The Forty-Fourth Session of the UN Sub

Transcription

Scholarship Repository
University of Minnesota Law School
Articles
Faculty Scholarship
1993
The Forty-Fourth Session of the UN SubCommission on Prevention of Discrimination and
Protection of Minorities and the Special Session of
the Commission on Human Rights on the
Situation in the Former Yugoslavia
Alya Z. Kayal
Penny L. Parker
David Weissbrodt
University of Minnesota Law School, [email protected]
Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.umn.edu/faculty_articles
Part of the Law Commons
Recommended Citation
Alya Z. Kayal, Penny L. Parker, and David Weissbrodt, The Forty-Fourth Session of the UN Sub-Commission on Prevention of
Discrimination and Protection of Minorities and the Special Session of the Commission on Human Rights on the Situation in the Former
Yugoslavia, 15 Hum. Rts. Q. 410 (1993), available at http://scholarship.law.umn.edu/faculty_articles/407.
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Minnesota Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in the Faculty
Scholarship collection by an authorized administrator of the Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected].
HUMAN RIGHTS QUARTERLY
The Forty-Fourth Session of the UN
Sub-Commission on Prevention of
Discrimination and Protection of
Minorities and the Special Session of the
Commission on Human Rights on the
Situation in the Former Yugoslavia
Alya Z. Kayal, Penny L. Parker,and David Weissbrodt*
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION
II. THE FIRST SPECIAL SESSION OF THE COMMISSION
ON HUMAN RIGHTS ON THE SITUATION IN THE
FORMER YUGOSLAVIA
III. COUNTRY SITUATIONS
A. Bougainville (Papua New Guinea)
B. Cambodia
C. Colombia
D. East Timor (Indonesia)
E. El Salvador
F. Guatemala
G. Haiti
H. Iran
I. Iraq
J. Israeli-Occupied Territories
K. Peru
*
411
413
417
418
419
420
420
422
422
423
423
424
425
425
The authors would like to thank Mary Thacker for all her secretarial assistance on this
article.
Human Rights Quarterly 15 (1993) 410-458 ©o1993 by The Johns Hopkins University Press
1993
Forty-Fourth Session of the UN Sub-Commission
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
IX.
X.
L. Somalia
M. South Africa
N. United States: Navajo and Hopi
0. Confidential 1503 Procedure
FINAL STUDIES AND REPORTS
A. Freedom of Opinion and Expression
B. Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights
C. Violations Against UN Staff
D. Detained Juveniles
E. Human Rights and Youth
F. Investment in South Africa
PROGRESS REPORTS AND STUDIES
A. Fair Trial
B. Restitution
C. Environment
D. AIDS/HIV-Infected Persons
E. Minorities
F. Independence of the Judiciary
G. Ratification of Human Rights Instruments
H. Treaties and Agreements between States and
Indigenous Populations
ANNUALLY UPDATED REPORTS
A. States of Emergency
B. Apartheid and South Africa
NEW INITIATIVES AND WORKING PAPERS
A. Measures to Combat Racism
B. Science and Technology
C. Working Paper on Housing
D. Working Paper on Population Transfers
E. Working Paper on Impunity
F. Other Working Papers
WORKING GROUPS OF THE SUB-COMMISSION
A. Working Group on Indigenous Populations
B. Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery
C. Working Group on Detention
REFORM OF THE SUB-COMMISSION'S WORK
FINAL OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSION
426
426
427
428
428
428
430
430
431
432
432
433
433
434
435
436
436
438
439
440
441
441
441
442
442
442
443
443
444
445
446
446
450
452
453
457
I. INTRODUCTION
The twenty-six members of the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities (hereinafter Sub-Commission) convened
Vol. 15
for the Sub-Commission's forty-fourth session during 3-28 August 1992 in
Geneva, Switzerland.1 The Sub-Commission conducted its 1992 session
amid growing crises in the former Yugoslavia and continuing problems in
Iraq. Once again, the Sub-Commission faced an overcrowded agenda with
little time to give consideration to the multitude of studies and reports presented. The Sub-Commission, however, adopted a resolution to which were
annexed significant reforms of its methods of work, as well as path-breaking
resolutions on human rights violations in Bosnia-Herzegovina (former Yugoslavia), East Timor, Bougainville, and Haiti. In addition, the Sub-Commission faced new initiatives, for example, in regard to arms production and
trade, international norms concerning detained juveniles, and discrimination
against gay and lesbian people.
This article discusses the accomplishments of the forty-fourth session,
including resolutions regarding human rights violations in specific countries,
studies on various human rights issues, pre-sessional working groups on
indigenous populations and on contemporary forms of slavery, reform of
the Sub-Commission, and new initiatives.
1. The official report of the forty-fourth session is found in U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/
58 (1992) [hereinafter 1992 Report]. The United Nations Economic and Social Council
(ECOSOC) established the Sub-Commission in 1947 to study issues related to discrimination and protection of minorities. The Sub-Commission is an expert body of twentysix members who serve in their individual capacity. Members are elected to four-year
terms by the Commission on Human Rights. Like other UN subsidiary bodies, the composition of the Sub-Commission reflects a geographical balance that is maintained by
allocating seats on the basis of five regional groups: Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin
America, and West European and Other. The 1992 members of the Sub-Commission
were: Miguel Alfonso Martinez (Cuba), Awn Shawket Al-Khasawneh (Jordan), Judith Sefi
Attah (Nigeria), Marc Bossuyt (Belgium), Volodymyr Boutkevitch (Ukraine), Linda Chavez
(United States), Stanislav Chernichenko (Russian Federation), Erica-Irene A. Daes (Greece),
Leandro Despouy (Argentina), Asbjorn Eide (Norway), Clemencia Forero Ucros (Colombia), El Hadji Guissd (Senegal), Maksum-UI-Hakim (Bangladesh), Ribot Hatano (Japan),
Claude Heller (Mexico), Louis Joinet (France), Ahmed Khalifa (Egypt), Fatma Zohra Ksentini
(Algeria), loan Maxim (Romania), Claire Palley (United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland), SaYd Naceur Ramadhane (Tunisia), Gilberto Vergne Saboia (Brazil),
Rajinder Sachar (India), Tian Jin (China), Halima Embarek Warzazi (Morocco), and Fisseha
Yimer (Ethiopia).
This article is adapted from one which appeared in 9 AIUSA Legal Support Network
Newsletter 49 (1992). For other analyses of the 1992 session, see generally Martin
MacPherson, Rebecca Elliott, & Polly Stewart, United Nations Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, Forty-Fourth Session, Quaker
United Nations Office (1992): Adrien-Claude Zoller, Analytical Report of the 44th Session
of the Sub-Commission, 17-18 Hum. Rts. Monitor 6 (1992). For analyses of previous
sessions of the Sub-Commission, see generally Karen Reierson & David Weissbrodt, The
43rd Session of the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of
Minorities, 14 Hum. Rts. Q. 232 (1992) and the articles cited id. at 232; Reed Brody,
Maureen Convery, & David Weissbrodt, The 42nd Session of the Sub-Commission on
Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, 13 Hum. Rts. Q. 260 (1991);
Robin Maher & David Weissbrodt, The 4 Ist Session of the Sub-Commission on Prevention
of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, 12 Hum. Rts. Q. 290 (1990). For other
articles on the Sub-Commission, see Robin Maher & David Weissbrodt, supra, at 290.
1993
II. THE SPECIAL SESSION OF THE COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
ON THE SITUATION IN THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA
The first special session of the Sub-Commission's parent body, the Commission on Human Rights, convened during the same period (13-15 August
2
1992) in Geneva to address the human rights crisis in the former Yugoslavia.
The resulting special session challenged both Commission and Sub-Commission members to search for new mechanisms and procedures by which
both bodies could offer constructive solutions to emerging crises without
interfering in each other's work or the work of other UN bodies (e.g., the
Security Council and the General Assembly), which were meeting or about
to convene during this same period of time.
On 29 July 1992, the Permanent Representative of Bosnia and Herzegovina, in a letter to the President of the Security Council, requested Security
Council intervention and attached a list of ninety-four concentration camps
and prisons in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as eleven such camps in
Serbia and Montenegro. 3 In a letter dated 5 August 1992, the Permanent
Representative of the United States to the United Nations in Geneva, Ambassador Morris B. Abram, invoked ECOSOC resolution 1990/484 and requested the "convening of the Commission on Human Rights in an exceptional session at the earliest possible date, to discuss the dangerous situation
in the former Yugoslavia." 5 Thirty-five members of the Commission reacted
positively to Mr. Abram's request 6 and therefore, the special session of the
2. See Report of the Commission on Human Rights on its First Special Session, U.N. Docs.
E1 992/22; F/CN.4/1992/84/Add.1 (1992).
3. Letter dated 29 July 1992, reproduced in U.N. Doc. S/24365 (31 July 1992). Muhammed
Sacirbey, the Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Bosnia and Herzegovina,
requested the United Nations Security Council to take steps to secure the safety of victims
so that they can eventually return to their homes, as agreed in the London Agreement of
17 July 1992.
4. At the request of Non-Aligned countries during a September 1989 summit, there were
negotiations at the United Nations on revising the geographical composition of the Commission and strengthening the role and efficiency ofthe United Nations. These negotiations
led to the adoption of ECOSOC Resolution 1990/48 on 25 May 1990 which, among
other things, authorized the Commission on Human Rights to hold special emergency
meetings between its regular sessions, as long as the majority of the member states agree.
In June 1992 the Arab member states requested the convening of an emergency session
to examine the situation in the Israeli-occupied territories. The majority of the member
states did not favor such a session, evidently because the situation had not significantly
changed since the last Commission session.
5. See U.N. Doc. EICN.4/1992/S-1/2 (1992).
6. The following members of the Commission agreed to the special session on the former
Yugoslavia: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Barbados, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada,
Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Czech and Slovak Federal Republic, France, Gambia, Germany, Hungary, India, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Lesotho, Mauritania, Netherlands,
Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Senegal, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, United Kingdom, United
States, Uruguay, and Venezuela.
Vol. 15
Commission convened quite promptly across the hall from the Sub-Commission.
The Sub-Commission responded by passing a unanimous resolution,
which it hand-delivered to the Chair of the Commission, Mr. Pal Solt (Hungary), condemning "ethnic cleansing" policies, which in the former Yugoslavia have generated vast displacements of people and refugees, particularly
of the Muslim populations in Bosnia and Herzegovina.7 The Sub-Commission
demanded that massive violations of the right to life and other human rights
be stopped and called for full reparation to displaced persons and prosecution
of those persons responsible for crimes.8
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) told the
Commission that rarely had human rights violations been so gross, systematic,
and so clearly targeted at uprooting people from their homes and destroying
communities, as in the the former Yugoslavia.9 According to the UNHCR,
more than half of Bosnia-Herzegovina functioned as a detention center to
establish ethnically pure zones. The International Committee of the Red
Cross (ICRC) had visited 20,000 prisoners, of which 8,300 had been seen
in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The ICRC reported that no respect existed for civilian
prisoners, medical services, and the emblems of the ICRC or the United
Nations. 10
Numerous speeches were heard by the Commission describing the atrocities in the former Yugoslavia and urging humanitarian intervention, war
crimes prosecution of those responsible, and public condemnation of the
government and military authorities who had failed to protect human rights.
The Ambassador of Yugoslavia, Branko Brankovic, denied all allegations of
the existence of concentration camps." He stated that the real aggressors
in the conflict were "states" which had prematurely recognized BosniaHerzegovina as a country and that they alone were responsible for the killing
and destruction.' 2 The President of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Alija Izethegovic, in a letter dated 5 August 1992 to the Permanent Representative of the United States at Geneva, however, described in detail
gruesome events and torture in Serbian controlled concentration camps,
reminiscent to events during the Second World War.' 3 Credible reports from
7. U.N. Doc. 1992/S-1/1 Annex (1992). See also Sub-Comm'n Dec. 1992/103, 1992 Report,
supra note 1, at 95.
8. Sub-Comm'n Dec. 1992/103, 1992 Report, supra note 1, at 95.
9. U.N. Press Release HR/3139, at 4 (13 August 1992).
10. Id. at 5.
11. U.N. Press Release HR/3141, at 1-3 (13 August 1992).
12. Id. See Statement by the Prime Minister of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Milan
Panic, on the alleged existence of "concentration camps" on 6 August 1992 in Belgrade.
U.N. Doc. FICN.4/1992/S-1/3 Annex Ill.
13. U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/1992/S-1/4 (1992). President Izethegovic described the situation in the
Prijedor area, where there are allegedly 13 camps and prisons holding 33,500 detainees.
1993
the press and nongovernmental organizations also seemed to confirm these
reports of abuses.
Unlike the circumstances which often prevailed after Cold War debates,
the Commission was able to move toward an action-oriented program, deploying a special rapporteur and other fact-finding mechanisms to confirm
the human rights situation in the former Yugoslav territory. The negotiations
toward a draft resolution were a delicate affair.14 A number of Middle East
governments, including Egypt and Turkey, insisted that the draft resolution
clearly identify the aggressor and the victims,' 5 while other members of the
Commission preferred to avoid naming the aggressor. The debate was further
complicated by the issue of who represents the former Yugoslavia; the representative of the United Kingdom, speaking on behalf of the European
Community and its member states, refused to recognize the newly constituted
Yugoslav Federation as the successor to the former Federation of Yugoslavia.
After several modifications to the draft resolution (for example the inclusion of a reference to the Sub-Commission resolution which in turn referred to the Muslim population of Bosnia-Herzegovina as the principal
victim of the crisis), the Commission on Human Rights adopted a resolution
6
on the situation of human rights in the territory of the former Yugoslavia.1
The resolution strongly condemned the practice of "ethnic cleansing." The
resolution also reminded parties that those persons who commit or order
grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Additional
Protocols of 1977 are individually responsible in respect of such breaches.
The Commission decided to appoint a Special Rapporteur, Mr. Tadeusz
Mazowiecki, the previous Prime Minister of Poland, to investigate the human
rights situation in the former Yugoslavia, in particular Bosnia-Herzegovina,
and to provide a preliminary report to the Secretary-General no later than
28 August 1992. The Commission's Special Rapporteur on Summary and
Arbitrary Executions, a member of the Sub-Commission (Louis Joinet), and
several staff members of the UN Human Rights Centre, were also asked to
7
join Mr. Mazowiecki in his fact-finding mission.1
The worst camp is reputedly Omarska camp where thousands of prisoners are tortured.
According to testimony from survivors, many prisoners have been killed by having their
heads beaten against walls and four "S" letters were carved on the chest of one victim.
14. Comm'n Draft Res., U.N. Doc. EICN.4/S-1/L.2 (13 August 1992).
15. U.N. Press Release HR13145, at 2, 6 (14 August 1992). The representative of Egypt stated
that the text of the draft resolution was unsatisfactory as it failed to designate clearly the
aggressor and the victims, namely the Muslim community. He also regretted that the right
to self-determination of the people of Bosnia-Herzegovina was not affirmed in the resolution. U.N. Press Release DH/1209, at 3 (20 August 1992).
16. U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/1992/S-11
(1992).
17. The Commission's special rapporteurs and experts on torture and internally displaced
persons and and the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention were also requested to
specially apply their fields of expertise to an examination of the situation in the former
Yugoslavia.
Vol. 15
The Special Rapporteur, Mr. Tadeusz Mazowiecki, visited the former
Yugoslavia, in particular Bosnia-Herzegovina, during the period 21-26 August. Mr. Mazowiecki was accompanied on his mission by Louis Joinet
(France), the Chairman of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, and
Bacre W. Ndiaye (Senegal), the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions. The mission met with representatives of governments, local authorities, intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations, and interviewed a number of victims and witnesses of human rights
abuses.
Mr. Mazowiecki's first report on the situation of human rights in the
former Yugoslavia' 8 stated that most of the area, in particular Bosnia-Herzegovina, is the "scene of massive and systematic violations of human rights,
as well as serious grave violations of humanitarian law." 19 The report noted
that, although there were victims on all sides, the situation for Muslims is
"particularly tragic" as they feel they are threatened with extermination.2 °
The report revealed several examples of harassment, discrimination, torture,
and violence against the Muslim population. 21 Mr. Mazowiecki's report
provided several recommendations, including neutralizing heavy weaponry
in Bosnia and Herzegovina, calling upon the competent authorities to abandon ethnic cleansing, increasing the size of the United Nations Protective
Force (UNPROFOR) and extending its mandate, granting full access by the
ICRC to all detention camps, establishing an investigative commission with
the assistance of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances of the Commission on Human Rights, establishing an information
agency to counteract the dissemination of hatred among the population, and
prosecuting those people responsible for flagrant human rights violations
22
and breaches of international humanitarian law.
In summary, the circumstances of the rapidly unfurling crisis in theformer
Yugoslavia, the first special session of the Commission, and the simultaneous
convening of other UN bodies to study the situation, made it difficult for
the Commission and Sub-Commission to coordinate and implement their
working mechanisms in an effective manner. It was nonetheless impressive
to see the quick reaction by both organizations to the crisis, as well as their
unique contribution to the overall debate process. These circumstances also
revealed, however, that there is room for improvement in the mechanisms
of the Commission and the Sub-Commission to respond better to similar
events in the future.
18.
19.
20.
21.
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/1992/S-1/9 (1992).
Id. at 2.
Id. at 11.
There were several examples of the crisis situation in the former Yugoslavia. For example,
one witness stated that every night during curfew, houses are burnt down and a large
number of people are interrogated, beaten, and tortured by police or forced to beat each
other. Id. at 2-3.
22. Id. at 11-13.
1993
There were also concerns about the delay in releasing a final report of
the special session (and the unusual decision that the report be released
from New York, not Geneva); the lack of advanced logistical planning which
led to a nearly week-long delay in sending Mr. Mazowiecki's team to Yugoslavia; the unfortunate decision to disseminate a press release on the
Special Rapporteur's itinerary which could have placed him and his team
in great personal danger from snipers and would-be assassins; the decision
not to reconvene the special session once the Special Rapporteur's report
was received; 23 the apparent lack of coordination between ongoing UN
proceedings in New York and Geneva on the Yugoslav crisis; 24 and the
ambiguity in the Special Rapporteur's mandate concerning whether he was
25
only to visit the territory of the former Yugoslavia on one occasion.
Finally, while the Yugoslav crisis was certainly important and deserving
of special session consideration by the Commission in August 1992, two
other serious human rights crises were also simultaneously unfolding in
Somalia and Iraq, where there were credible reports of severe deprivations
of humanitarian aid to civilian populations. It is regrettable that the Commission was unable to respond as effectively to these two crises as it did to
the Yugoslav crisis.
Ill. COUNTRY SITUATIONS
Aside from its extraordinary cooperation with the Commission on Human
Rights, the Sub-Commission employs two procedures, one public and the
other confidential, to examine the human rights situation in specific countries. On the one hand, Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) resolution
1235 authorizes the Sub-Commission to discuss violations of human rights
in specific countries. 26 Nongovernmental organizations, observer governments, and Sub-Commission members may participate in the discussion;
the Sub-Commission may then adopt resolutions on the human rights situations. On the other hand, ECOSOC resolution 150327 authorizes a confidential procedure whereby the Sub-Commission members meet in private
23. In November 1992, the United States and Turkey proposed that the Commission be
convened to discuss Bosnia-Herzegovina; the Commission met for its second session in
early December.
24. For example, the Security Council passed its two Bosnia and Herzegovina resolutions,
resolutions 770 and 771, on 13 August 1992, but it appears that these actions were not
reported to the Commission on the second and final day of the session, 14 August 1992.
25. The Special Rapporteur did in fact return to Bosnia-Herzegovina in October 1992 and
prepared three further reports. See U.N. Docs. E/CN.4/1992/S-1/10 (1992); A/47/666
(1992). See also U.N. Docs. A/47/418-S/24516 (1992); A47/635-S/24766 (1992); A/47/
666-S/24809 (1992).
26. E.S.C. Res. 1235 (XLII), 42 U.N. ESCOR, Supp. No. 1, at 17, U.N. Doc. E/4393 (1967).
27. E.S.C. Res. 1503 (XLVlII), 48 U.N. ESCOR, Supp. No. 1A, at 8, U.N. Doc. E/4832/Add.1
(1970).
Vol. 15
to consider communications alleging consistent patterns of gross violations
of human rights in particular countries. The Sub-Commission then confidentially28 refers to the Commission the situations that merit further consideration.
The Sub-Commission conducts its public examination of the human
rights situation in specific countries under its agenda item on the "question
29
of the violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms." In 1992, the
Sub-Commission, under that agenda item, adopted resolutions on the following twelve countries or territories: Bougainville (Papua New Guinea),
Cambodia, East Timor, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Iran, Iraq, Israelioccupied Arab territories, Peru, Somalia, and South Africa. In addition, the
Sub-Commission adopted two related resolutions under different agenda
items, regarding the relocation of Navajo and Hopi families in the United
States and the monitoring of the transition to democracy in South Africa. A
draft resolution on Colombia was withdrawn by the sponsor due to lack of
support and in view of the assurances made by the observer government of
Colombia to cooperate with the United Nations.
The voting on country-specific resolutions was held by the secret ballot
procedure under Rule 57. 3o In 1991, the Sub-Commission formally approved
the secret ballot procedure and suspended open voting for country-specific
resolutions in order to increase the independence of the Sub-Commission
members and insulate them from government pressure.3 '
A. Bougainville (Papua New Guinea)
The Sub-Commission adopted for the first time a resolution on Bougainville
in light of reports of human rights violations by the government of Papua
28. See infra notes 75-78 and accompanying text for a discussion of the countries considered
under the 1503 procedure at the 1992 session.
29. The full name of agenda item 6 is "Question of the violation of human rights and
fundamental freedoms, including policies of racial discrimination and segregation and
of apartheid, in all countries, with particular reference to colonial and other dependent
countries and territories: report of the Sub-Commission under Commission on Human
Rights resolution 8 (XXIII)."
30. Rule 57 reads as follows: "A proposal or motion before the Commission for decision
shall be voted upon if any member so requests. When no member requests a vote, the
commission may adopt proposals or motions without a vote." Rules of Procedure of the
Functional Commission of the Economic and Social Council, at 14, U.N. Doc. E/5975/
Rev.1 (1983).
31. C.H.R. Res. 1991/81, ESCOR, Supp. No.2, at 182, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/1991/91 (1991);
E.S.C. Res. 1991/31, at 67, U.N. Doc. E/1991/INF/5 (1991). For a discussion of open
voting prior to 1991, see Rule 59, Rules of Procedure of the Functional Commission of
the Economic and Social Council, at 14, U.N. Doc. E/5975/Rev.1 (1983). See also Brody,
Convery, & Weissbrodt, supra note 1, at 265-67.
1993
New Guinea. 32 The consensus resolution is unique in several ways and
serves as evidence that concerted NGO efforts can produce support for new
resolutions, even in situations where very few first-hand accounts are available to corroborate NGO reports. Several NGO interventions addressed the
denial of freedom of movement within and outside of the country.33 The
resolution called upon the government to restore that freedom without
delay.3 4 The Sub-Commission also requested the Special Rapporteur, Miguel
Alfonso Martfnez (Cuba), to include a review of agreements between the
indigenous peoples of Bougainville and the government of Papua New
Guinea in his ongoing study of treaties with indigenous peoples.3 s Some
Sub-Commission members expressed concern over the lack of concrete
evidence of human rights violations in the region and the financial cost of
accepting this resolution.3 6 Claire Palley (United Kingdom), the chief sponsor
of this resolution, responded that the reason for the lack of evidence was
due in part to restrictions on travel.
B. Cambodia
The Sub-Commission's unanimous resolution on Cambodia welcomed recent efforts of the United Nations to protect human rights and underscored
the importance of restructuring the country's legal systems to improve human
rights protection.3 7 The Sub-Commission also encouraged the Secretaryand advisory services
General to implement a long-term technical assistance
3
program for the enjoyment of human rights.
During the discussion on this resolution, several members expressed
concern that the Sub-Commission should not duplicate the efforts of the
Security Council.3 9 The resolution's chief sponsor, Asbjorn Eide (Norway),
32. Sub-Comm'n Res. 1992/19, 1992 Report, supra note 1, at 56.
33. Interventions were made by several NGOs, including the International Work Group for
Indigenous Affairs, U.N. Press Release HR/3130, at 4 (7 August 1992); the Indigenous
World Association, U.N. Press Release HR/3136, at 2 (11 August 1992); Habitat International Coalition, U.N. Press Release HR/3148, at 4 (17 August 1992); Pax Christi
International, U.N. Press Release HR/3152, at 6 (19 August 1992).
35. Id. at 57.
36. According to the UN Secretariat, the financial cost of travel and expenses for 1993 for
this resolution would be $15,470. Statement of Mr. Moktar Cisse, 27 August 1992.
38. Id. at 53.
39. Halima Warzazi (Morocco) stated that it was not in the interest of the Sub-Commission
to duplicate work of the Security Council and she asked the co-sponsors to make changes
in the draft resolution. Tian Jin (China) said that the draft resolution should be withdrawn
because there was no need for it, and argued that operative paragraph 2 was politically
motivated because it singled out the Khmer Rouge as not abiding by prior agreements.
Stanislav Chernichenko (Russian Federation) also expressed skepticism about the need
Vol. is
urged that adoption of the resolution was necessary to keep the pressure on
all sides to complete the Paris Peace Agreements. A modification of the
resolution was accepted, striking reference to the Khmer Rouge's reluctance
to comply with prior agreements; as modified, the resolution was adopted
by consensus.
C. Colombia
A draft resolution on Colombia was withdrawn by its sponsor, apparently
due in part to lack of support and in part to pledges made by the Colombian
government in last minute lobbying efforts to Sub-Commission members.4 0
The draft resolution had criticized widespread disappearances, summary
executions, the weakened judicial system, and the failure to implement the
new 1991 Constitution, including the new constitutional protections for
human rights. Adoption of the resolution would have been very significant
since, coupled with this year's resolution criticizing Peru, it would have
meant that two new Latin American countries were the subject of SubCommission criticism. 41 In consideration of the withdrawal of the resolution,
the representative of Colombia pledged his government's support for the
human rights objectives cited in the resolution's text and promised that his
government would cooperate with United Nations organs in the improve42
ment of human rights protections in his country.
D. East Timor
The Sub-Commission adopted a strong condemnatory resolution on East
Timor by a vote of thirteen to six with four abstentions, and requested the
Secretary-General to compile reports of human rights abuses in East Timor
from NGOs and others, and to submit the information to the Commission
on Human Rights and its Sub-Commission in 1993.43
40.
41.
42.
43.
for the resolution, but disagreed with Tian Jin about the political nature of operative
paragraph 2, stating that the Khmer Rouge had been guilty of human rights violations in
the past.
Sub-Comm'n Res. 1992/L.44.
Normally, the Latin American region successfully opposes resolutions against its members
except for those countries commonly receiving criticism, namely El Salvador, Guatemala,
and Haiti. It became apparent this year that an initiative against Colombia did not have
sufficient support and the resolution was therefore withdrawn by its co-sponsors.
Statement by the representative of Colombia on 27 August 1992. See also U.N. Press
Release HR/3162, at 1 (27 August 1992).
Sub-Comm'n Res. 1992/20, 1992 Report, supra note 1, at 57.
1993
At last year's session, the Chair of the Sub-Commission read a compromise statement on East Timor in lieu of a formal resolution due to Indonesia's
then expressed willingness to investigate and correct human rights violations
in the country.44 This year, however, conditions had worsened with the
incident at Dili on 12 November 1991, in which the army killed civilians
during a political demonstration at a cemetery, and the continuing reports
of widespread human rights violations against East Timorese civilians. 4s The
Sub-Commission, appalled at the massacre of East Timorese civilians and
disturbed by the heavy sentences imposed on protesters under the "AntiSubversion Law," 46 urged Indonesia to provide the Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances with information regarding missing
persons during the Dili incident and to cooperate with the families of victims
47
so that the dead could receive a proper burial.
Despite strenuous lobbying by the observer government of Indonesia to
defeat the resolution, many organizations and members of the Sub-Commission were steadfast in their criticisms of the violent incidents in Dili and
elsewhere in the country. The observer government of Indonesia, however,
reiterated that human rights violations in East Timor were unsubstantiated
and it regretted that the resolution on East Timor was unbalanced, since
48
Indonesia said it had made efforts to address the situation in Dili.
44. Sub-Comm'n Res. 1991/8, 1991 Report, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1991/65 (1991). The
statement conveyed optimism about the upcoming visits to East Timor by the Special
Rapporteur on Torture and by a group of Portuguese parliamentarians. This decision was
apparently a gesture to promote a spirit of openness and to facilitate the work of the
Special Rapporteur on Torture. See Reierson & Weissbrodt, The 43rd Sub-Commission,
supra note 1, at 239.
45. On 12 November 1991, Indonesian soldiers opened fire at a funeral procession on more
than 1,000 civilians who were mourning the death of a man killed by Indonesian Security
Forces on 28 October 1991. Indonesian Troops Open Fire on Timor Mourners, N.Y.
Times, 13 November 1991, at All. Although Indonesia, which invaded East Timor in
1975, stated that 50 people died during this incident, journalists and human right groups
estimated the death toll as much higher. See Massacre Anniversary, The Washington Post,
13 November 1992, at A24.
Ironically, there have been reports that Maj. Gen. Sintong Panjaitan, one of the military
commanders responsible for the Dili massacre, was reportedly studying business administration at Boston University. Ann Treseder, East TimorAlumni, N.Y. Times, 25 September
1992, at A26. The Center for Constitutional Rights, on behalf of a mother whose son was
killed in Dili, brought suit against Maj. Gen. Panjaitan in U.S. District Court in Boston.
The summons, however, has been returned, and therefore the whereabouts of Maj. Gen.
Panjaitan are not known, although he has an unlisted phone number in Boston. Harvard
Business School also denied unconfirmed reports that he was enrolled or had applied to
the school. Indonesian General Sued Under New Law: Mother Accuses Him in Son's
Slaying, The Boston Globe, 25 September 1992, at 19.
46. Sub-Comm'n Res. 1992/20, 1992 Report, supra note 1, at 57-58.
47. Id. at 58.
48. Oral statement by the representative of Indonesia on 27 August 1992. See also U.N. Press
Release HR/3163, at 2 (27 August 1992).
Vol. 15
E. El Salvador
Although the consensus resolution on El Salvador welcomed the signing of
Peace Agreements between the government and the Frente Farabundo Martf
para la Liberacion Nacional (FMLN) on 16 January 1992, it noted serious
delays in implementing various provisions of the agreements. 49 The resolution also regretted the serious attack committed against a staff member of
the new Office of the Attorney-General for the Protection of Human Rights,
50
but noted that investigations were underway to apprehend the perpetrators.
F. Guatemala
The resolution on Guatemala was adopted by a vote of thirteen to four with
four abstentions and with one member not participating. 5' The resolution
expressed concern over the persistence of serious human rights violations
and urged the government to intensify investigations to identify violators of
human rights, and to ensure that the judicial system can provide protection
to the judiciary, witnesses, and victims.5 2 In light of several statements by
indigenous peoples of Guatemala, the resolution called upon the government
to respond to their requests to improve economic, social, and cultural conditions, as well as to adopt measures to facilitate the return of refugees and
displaced persons within the country.
Once again, some members expressed the view that if a parent body
of the Sub-Commission is already addressing the situation in Guatemala,
there was no need for the Sub-Commission, to introduce the resolution,
especially since there were arguably no new developments since the 1992
49. Sub-Comm'n Res. 1992/13, 1992 Report, supra note 1, at 46. The January 1992 Peace
Accord between the government of El Salvador and the FMLN contains provisions for an
end to armed conflict, as well as far reaching reforms. See Ingrid Kircher, The Human
Rights Work of the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador, 10 Netherlands Q.
Hum. Rts. 303 (1992). Kircher's article notes that the Peace Accord also includes economic, social, and judicial reforms. The article also describes the negotiation process
and work of the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador (ONUSAL). ONUSAL,
a human rights verification mission, was established by the San Jose Agreement on Human
Rights signed by the government of El Salvador and the FMLN on 26 July 1990. On 20
May 1991, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted resolution 693 (1991) establishing ONUSAL to monitor all agreements between the government and the FMLN. The
article concludes that "continued international support for the reforms and continued
vigilance of the human rights situation by the U.N., in the form of ONUSAL's human
rights mandate, will be a decisive factor in the success or failure of this transition towards
lasting peace." Id. at 317. See also Cynthia Arnson & David Holiday, El Salvador Peace
and Human Rights: Successes and Shortcomings of the United Nations Observer Mission
in El Salvador (ONUSAL), 4 Human Rights Watch No. 8, 2 September 1992, at 1.
52. Id. at 55.
1993
session of the Commission on Human Rights. 3 The majority of the SubCommission, however, believed that a Sub-Commission resolution was
needed to maintain pressure on Guatemala.
G. Haiti
The resolution on Haiti, adopted without a vote, strongly condemned the
overthrow of the constitutionally elected President, Mr. Jean-Bertrand
Aristide, the use of violence, and the deterioration of human rights in the
country.5 4 The resolution drew attention to the Haitian nationals fleeing the
country and requested support for the efforts undertaken to assist them. The
Sub-Commission appealed to all parties to engage in dialogue necessary for
the restoration of the lawful government and the re-establishment of democracy in Haiti.
H. Iran
The Sub-Commission adopted a resolution on the continuing human rights
violations in Iran by a vote of eighteen to three with two abstentions and
with three members not participating. s The efforts to achieve a consensus
by modifying the text of the resolution failed because Iran objected to some
6
supporting information from the Mujahidin opposition group.
53. On the one hand, statements by Linda Chavez (United States), Halima Warzazi (Morocco),
and Stanislav Chernichenko (Russian Federation) on 27 August 1992 reflected the general
concern that the Sub-Commission should not interfere with the work of the Commission
on Human Rights, especially when there were no new developments. On the other hand,
Judith Sefi Attah (Nigeria) pointed to the continuing human rights violations in Guatemala
affecting indigenous peoples, and Claire Palley (United Kingdom) stated that since the
Sub-Commission is not in continuous session throughout the year, it was important for
the Sub-Commission to show continuing interest by adopting this resolution. Oral statements of members on 27 August 1992.
56. The chief sponsor of the resolution on Iran, Claire Palley (United Kingdom), mentioned
the hard work that went into drafting this resolution. See Summary Record of the 34th
Meeting, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/SR.34 (1992). She specifically stated that she did
not consider any information from "terrorists," and that just because the resolution states
similar concerns as those expressed by "terrorists" did not mean the Sub-Commission
should not consider the resolution. In an oral statement, the Iranian government stated
that the resolution contained unfounded allegations provided by "terrorist" groups who
want to create a "Marxist-oriented society." The Iranian government further stated that
a US government document on Iran indicated that the Mujahidin have used methods of
terrorism, that Amnesty International also said that this group terrorizes the Kurds, and
that they have joined forces with the government of Saddam Hussein. The representative
further questioned how members from the United States and the United Kingdom could
have co-sponsored this resolution and joined forces with the alleged "Iraqi terrorist group,"
Vol. 15
The resolution deplored the expulsion in March 1992 of the delegation
of the International Committee of the Red Cross and expressed grave concern
at the rise of summary executions and arbitrary arrests of thousands of people
following anti-government demonstrations, as well as political assassinations
carried out abroad.5 The Sub-Commission resolution did not, however,
specifically address the assassination of exiled former Iranian Prime Minister
Shahpur Bakhtiar in Paris or the murder of the Japanese translator of Salman
Rushdie's novel The Satanic Verses and the attempted.murder of the Italian
translator of the same work.5 Furthermore, the Sub-Commission condemned
the torture and ill-treatment of political prisoners; the stoning of citizens
(frequently women); and the persecution of religious minorities-particularly
the Baha'is.5 9 The resolution called on the Commission's Special Representative on Iran to include information on executions, arrests, formation of paramilitary units, and the assassination of Professor Kazem Rajavi, in his next
report to the General Assembly and the Commission on Human Rights.
I. Iraq
The resolution on the situation in Iraq, adopted by consensus, focused on
the serious consequences of the UN embargo on Iraq's civilian population,
especially women, children, and the underprivileged sectors of the population.60 It appealed to the international community, including the government of Iraq, not to obstruct the supply of food and medicines to civilians.
Pursuant to an amendment proposed by Halima Warzazi (Morocco),
the Sub-Commission decided to change the title of the resolution from the
61
Situation on Human Rights in Iraq to the Humanitarian Situation in Iraq.
Linda Chavez (United States), however, believed that the text of the draft
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
and ended by saying that "The enemy of the enemy is a friend." Oral statement by the
representative of Iran at the 44th session of the Sub-Commission, Geneva, on 27 August
1992. See also U.N. Press Release HR/3162, at 2-3 (27 August 1992).
In 1990, the Sub-Commission passed a separate resolution condemning the assassination
of Professor Kazem Rajavi, a former Iranian diplomat living in exile in Switzerland. SubComm'n Res. 1990/8, at 26, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1990/59 (1990).
Hitoshi Igarashi was found stabbed to death in his office at Tsukuba University in Tokyo,
Japan, on 12 July 1991. Nine days earlier Ettore Capriolo had been attacked and wounded
by an Iranian in Milan, Italy. Both men had translated the novel, The Satanic Verses, by
Salman Rushdie. In 1989 Iranian leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini issued a death
sentence against Rushdie, claiming that his novel blasphemed the Islamic faith. Rushdie
has been in hiding since 1989.
Sub-Comm'n Dec. 1992/106, 1992 Report, supra note 1, at 96.
Halima Warzazi (Morocco) noted alarming reports by UNICEF and other agencies that
approximately 400,000 children will die due to lack of medicine and food; she stressed
the humanitarian nature of this resolution. Oral statement by Mrs. Warzazi on 27 August
1992.
1993
resolution was "totally inadequate" as it implied that the international community was responsible for starving the children of Iraq. 6 2 Mrs. Chavez
proposed several amendments, including adding a clause imploring the
government of Iraq, along with the international community, not to obstruct
the supply of food and medicine to the civilian population. The clause was
added to the resolution despite certain members who supported the nonpolitical humanitarian focus of the resolution; others believed that Mrs.
Chavez's amendments strengthened the resolution.6 3 The resolution, however, did not directly address the culpability of the government of Iraq.
J. Israeli-Occupied Territories
The Sub-Commission adopted a resolution on Palestine and other Arab
territories occupied by Israel by a vote of eleven to six with six abstentions. 64
Several experts criticized the resolution for failing to reflect substantial
changes in Middle East peace efforts in the past year and for not helping
the peace process.6 s The resolution repeated concerns in past resolutions:
it condemned Israel for gross violations of the Geneva Convention relative
to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, for continued occupation
of the Palestinian and other Arab territories, for establishing Israeli settlements
in the occupied territories, for its defiance of UN resolutions, and for the
inhuman treatment as well as terrorist practices against Syrian Arab citizens.
The resolution reiterated support for an international peace conference in
66
the Middle East.
K. Peru
The Sub-Commission adopted, for the first time, a consensus resolution on
Peru, which reflected concerns about the ending of the peace dialogue
62. Oral statement by Linda Chavez (United States) on 27 August 1992.
63. In response to a statement by Judith Sefi Attah (Nigeria) implying that Linda Chavez's
(United States) amendments politicize the essentially humanitarian resolution and that
the Sub-Commission should not use food and medicines as "war," Mrs. Chavez noted
that it is more political intentionally to omit the Iraqi government from the resolution. It
should be noted that it is rare for a resolution to be strengthened in the course of the
debate as apparently occured in regard to the resolution on Iraq. Oral statement by experts
on 27 August 1992.
65. In a brief oral statement on 26 August 1992, Linda Chavez (United States) noted that the
text did not reflect the fact that there have been human rights abuses on both sides.
Asbjorn Eide (Norway) expressed his disappointment with the resolution, especially since
it did not reflect the views of the Israeli government. For details, see Summary Record
of the 34th Meeting, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/SR.34 (1992).
Vol. 15
between the government and the opposition, the dissolution of the National
Congress, as well as growing criminal activities of terrorist groups.67 While
taking note of Peru's efforts to restore constitutional order and to hold general
elections, the resolution urged the government to improve its cooperation
with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and to guarantee full
respect for freedoms of assembly, association, expression, and opinion. The
resolution took note of the undertaking by Peruvian authorities to hold
national elections on 22 November 1992 to be monitored by the Organization of American States. Further, the Sub-Commission urged the Peruvian
authorities to resume a dialogue with the opposition. The September 1992
capture of Abimael Guzman Reynoso, founder and leader of the Sendero
authorities may foster a climate
Luminoso (Shining Path), by the Peruvian
68
for positive changes for the country.
L. Somalia
Humanitarian assistance was the focus of a consensus resolution on Somalia.69 The Sub-Commission noted with concern the reports of massive
violations of human rights, particularly extrajudicial executions and torture
committed by armed gangs, as well as the alarming number of displaced
persons and refugees who have left Somalia since January 1991.70 It requested
the UNHCR and the international community to provide needed humanitarian assistance to Somali citizens and refugees.
M. South Africa
The Sub-Commission passed two consensus resolutions under different
agenda items on South Africa. The first resolution strongly condemned con-
68. The 57 year old Abimael Guzman Reynoso was captured by Peruvian authorities on 13
September 1992, after nearly a twelve year hunt. The capture was seen as a great victory
for Peru and President Alberto Fujimori to end armed insurrection against the Peruvian
government. Shining Path has approximately 5,000 fighters and thousands of supporters.
See Fugitive Leader Of Maoist Rebels is Captured by the Police in Peru, N.Y. Times, 14
September 1992, at Al. In a military trial closed to the public, Guzman was convicted
of treason, held responsible for more than 20,000 deaths and more than $20 billion in
economic damages, and sentenced to life in prison. See Peru Convicts Maoist Rebel
Leader and Sentences Him to Life Imprisonment, N.Y. Times, 8 October 1992, at A3.
70. Id. at 44.
1993
tinuing violence in South Africa and urged the international community to
is an
refrain from establishing official links with South Africa until there
7
called
It
'
democracy.
to
transition
the
supervising
for
government
interim
to
upon the South African government to release all political detainees 7and
2
The
offenses.
related
securityof
convicted
persons
executing
from
refrain
resolution vigorously condemned military collaboration with the South African government-particularly in the nuclear field.
The second resolution on South Africa, adopted under a different agenda
item entitled "Review of Further Developments in Fields with which the
Sub-Commission has been Concerned," focused on monitoring the transition
to democracy.7 3 The resolution recommended that Judith Sefi Attah (Nigeria)
be appointed as special rapporteur to report annually on the transition to
democracy in South Africa. This report will replace Ahmed Khalifa's (Egypt)
annual report on companies investing in and offering economic assistance
to South Africa, as it was felt that the latter study was no longer discouraging
companies from such activities nor causing sufficient adverse publicity. The
Sub-Commission noted, however, that Mr. Khalifa's annual report had appeared to increase the pressure on the government to revise its racist policies.
N. United States: Navajo and Hopi
The Sub-Commission adopted a resolution, by consensus, on the relocation
of Navajo and Hopi families from northern Arizona and focused on court74
ordered mediation to seek a peaceful settlement. The resolution appealed
71.
72.
73.
74.
Sub-Comm'n Res. 1992/9, 1992 Report, supra note 1, at 38-40.
Id. at 39.
Sub-Comm'n Res 1992/6, 1992 Report, supra note 1, at 29.
Sub-Comm'n Res. 1992/36, 1992 Report, supra note 1, at 87. In 1987 (see Sub-Comm'n
Dec. 1987/110) the Sub-Commission had asked two of its members to attend US Congressional hearings on the Navajo-Hopi situation, but the scheduling of these hearings
did not permit attendance. In 1988 (see Sub-Comm'n Dec. 1988/105) the Sub-Commission
asked Erica-Irene Daes (Greece) and John Carey (alternate, United States) to investigate
the Navajo-Hopi situation and report back jointly to the Sub-Commission. Reports were
filed by both in the following year, taking different positions: Mr. Carey urged the SubCommission to refrain from taking sides in the dispute (see Draft Res. L.40, withdrawn,
and Mr. Carey's report, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1989/35 (Part II)); Mrs. Daes recommended that the Sub-Commission support an 18-month moratorium on further resettlement and that UN advisory services be offered to assist dispute resolution efforts (see
Mrs. Daes' report, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1989/35 (Part I)). The Sub-Commission that
year adopted a resolution urging that no further involuntary resettlement take place and
that the families and communities concerned be permitted to participate in the on-going
negotiations. See Sub-Comm'n Res. 1989/37. The Sub-Commission passed a further resolution in 1990 in support of a constructive resolution to the dispute between the Navajo
and Hopi communities. Sub-Comm'n Res. 1990/34.
Vol. 15
to the United States government to ensure, through cooperation with a courtappointed mediator, that no further relocation of families takes place.
0. Confidential 1503 Procedure
The Sub-Commission employs a confidential procedure, authorized by
ECOSOC Resolution 1503,11 to examine communications alleging consistent
patterns of gross violations of human rights in specific countries. The SubCommission's Working Group on Communications meets in private for up
to two weeks prior to the Sub-Commission session to consider such communications. The working group forwards communications on specific country situations to the Sub-Commission, which then decides, in private session,
which situations to refer to the attention of the Commission on Human
Rights.
In 1992 the Sub-Commission reportedly decided to transmit to the Commission communications on the following six countries: Bahrain, Chad,
Kenya, Rwanda, Sudan, and Zaire. 6 The Sub-Commission also decided to
continue to review for another year communications concerning Germany,
Syria, and Uganda for possible referral to the Commission's attention in
1993. 7 7 In addition, the Sub-Commission reportedly terminated its confidential examination of the human rights situation in the following six countries: Bhutan, Brazil, Djibouti, South Korea, Turkey, and the United States.7 8
IV. FINAL STUDIES AND REPORTS
The Sub-Commission received final reports on six studies: the right to freedom of opinion and expression; the realization of economic, social, and
cultural rights; human rights violations against UN staff members; standards
for detained individuals; human rights and youth; and investment in South
Africa.
A. Freedom of Opinion and Expression
The Sub-Commission commended Danilo Tfirk (Slovenia) and Louis Joinet
(France) for their final report on the right to freedom of opinion and ex75. E.S.C. Res. 1503 (XLVIII), U.N. ESCOR, 48th Sess., Supp. No.1 A, at 8, U.N. Doc. E/4832/
Add.1 (1970).
76. See Zoller, supra note 1, at 18.
77. Id.
78. Id.
1993
pression, but did not pass a resolution implementing any of their recommendations or proposals. 7 9 The authors recommended that standard-setting
be studied, especially with a view to limiting the circumstances under which
the media can legitimately be restricted from investigating and reporting.
The study also identified the "core" elements of the freedoms of opinion,
80
expression, and access to information which should never be restricted.
Mr. Turk further stated that restrictions should be permitted only if: (1) they
have legitimate purposes; (2) their legality is strictly respected; (3) they are
proportionate to the needs for which they are selected; and (4) they are
81
imposed in a manner compatible with a democratic society.
In a carefully prepared intervention, the United States criticized the Turk
and Joinet study for focusing unduly on restrictions of the freedom of ex82
pression and opinion, rather than on the realization of these rights. The
US representative stated that these freedoms are given special protection by
the First Amendment to the US Constitution, and therefore, the US government is "deeply skeptical of other international texts-including provisions
in the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights-which may permit extensive
83
controls on free expression and the press." Most NGOs, however, welcomed the report as a means for highlighting the frequent abuse of writers
and journalists, of whom more than 450 were imprisoned worldwide in
1991.84 In light of serious persecutions of journalists, Mr. Turk and Mr. Joinet
recommend that the Commission appoint a working group or rapporteur to
8s
address the protection of professionals in the field of information. The SubCommission, however, did not consider any resolution on this report and
79. U.N. Doc. ECN.4/Sub.2/1992/9 & Add.1 (1992). The conclusions and recommendations
of the authors are contained in Addendum 1.
80. U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/9/Add.1, at 3 (1992).
81. Statement by Danilo Tirk (Slovenia) on 21 August 1992. See Summary Record of the
27th Meeting, at 3, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/SR.27 (1992).
82. Statement by John R. Crook. See also U.N. Press Release HR/3159, at 5 (25 August 1992).
83. Statement of John Crook on 25 August 1992: "Neither the work of the Sub-Commission
nor of any other U.N. body should give sanction or credence for controls on freedom of
expression and a free press. As we have noted several times while their study was
underway, the authors start with the premise that controls on freedom of expression and
the press are sometimes justified. They then posit and refine an intellectual framework
for determining the extent for allowable controls. In our view, this is not how the problem
should be approached. The Sub-Commission should denounce and combat State controls
on expression and the press. It should not provide the blueprint for their enactment." Id.
at 3.
84. A representative of PEN International noted that 462 writers and journalists who have
been imprisoned in 1991. Many of them were imprisoned under laws which did not
appear to relate specifically to their writing, such as national security laws. See U.N.
Press Release HR/3158, at 2 (25 August 1992). In a statement for the NGO Article 19,
Frank Newman spoke of the increasing attacks against journalists in Turkey during 1992,
where at least eight journalists were killed this year. Mr. Newman also spoke about
disappearances and killings of journalists in Iran and Sri Lanka. Id. at 3-4.
85. U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/9/Add.1, at 3 (1992).
Vol. is
thus no action has been recommended to the Commission for the time being.
No further follow-up appears to be contemplated at present, unless the
Commission decides to initiate its own resolution.
B. Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights
The final report on the realization of economic, social, and cultural rights
by Danilo Tirk (Slovenia)8 6 received much favorable commentary from SubCommission members, as well as NGOs. Mr. Tirk introduced his report by
stating that "human development could be described as one of the greatest
dramas of contemporary mankind," and that the situation for the future is
not promising.87 He also pointed out that the current processes of change
in various parts of the world confirmed that the "concept of interdependence
and indivisibility of human rights, civil and political, economic, social and
cultural" was vital to development and promotion of human rights.88 Mr.
Tirk's final report concluded that due to afailure of governments and existing
models of development, there is a necessity for new approaches for the
enjoyment of economic, social, and cultural rights.8 9 Mr. Tirk's final report
generated substantial discussion immediately after a statement by US Ambassador Morris Abram. 90 Ambassador Abram stated that if every "need" of
a country, such as development, was transferred into a "right," there would
be a proliferation of rights and a dilution of the very concept of rights.91 He
stressed that civil and political rights are a requirement for any "free" society
and that there is a connection between liberty and economic progress.
Several Sub-Commission members disagreed with Ambassador Abram's
statement because economic, social, and cultural rights have always been
a part of human rights and were not "new" rights.92
C. Human Rights Violations Against UN Staff
Although Mary Concepcion Bautista (Philippines) was not present at the
1992 session, the Sub-Commission complimented her on her final report
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/16 (1992).
U.N. Press Release HR/3153, at 2 (20 August 1992).
Id. at 3.
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/16, at 45 (1992).
Id. Ambassador Abram further stated that if rights were "particularized" and regionalized
according to the traditions of different cultural, ethnic, or religious groups, the universality
of human rights would be destroyed.
92. In response to Ambassador Abram's intervention, Asbjorn Eide (Norway) pointed out that
in 1947, the Chairperson of the Commission on Human Rights, who was also the head
of the US delegation, had declared, "A man in need is not a free man." Although he
1993
concerning the protection of the human rights of UN staff members, experts,
and their families. 93 The final report includes a list of sixty-two staff members
who were victims of human rights violations as of 24 June 1992, plus the
names of twenty-six UN employees who have been killed since 1973.94 Mrs.
Bautista recommended an information campaign to combat "this abhorrent
practice." 95 The Sub-Commission resolution, adopted without a vote, expressed its appreciation to Mrs. Bautista on her work and requested the
Commission on Human Rights to use existing human rights machinery to
human rights of UN staff members,
examine the cases involving violations of
96
families.
their
and
consultants,
experts,
D. Detained Juveniles
Mary Concepcion Bautista (Philippines) also prepared her final report on
the application of international human rights standards to detained juveniles,9 7 and was warmly congratulated by the Sub-Commission for her efforts. 98 Due in part to Mrs. Bautista's efforts, a special meeting will take place
during Spring 1993 in Geneva among representatives of various UN bodies,
specialized agencies, intergovernmental organizations, and NGOs, to investigate further whether the several different UN standards issued by various
bodies concerning juvenile justice, juvenile delinquency, and juvenile detention can be harmonized. Mrs. Bautista's report recommends that international agencies coordinate their efforts to improve the conditions of detained individuals, that the feasibility of noncustodial measures be
investigated wherever possible, that juvenile justice personnel be trained,
99
and that penal institutions separate detained juveniles from detained adults.
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.
99.
agreed with Ambassador Abram that denials of freedom should not hide behind economic
policy, it was equally important to realize that the free market alone does not solve all
problems. Similarly, Gilberto Saboia (Brazil) agreed with Eide that these rights are not
"new" rights, but also concurred with Ambassador Abram that particularism should not
distract from universal recognition of human rights. Linda Chavez (United States) remarked
on astudy by the Urban Institute on revenue distribution in the United States to demonstrate
the tremendous income mobility in her country. Mrs. Chavez agreed with Mr. Eide that
a free market economy is not a panacea and noted, "Capitalism should be tempered
with charity, especially for those who are unable to care for themselves." See U.N. Press
Release HR3153 (20 August 1992) for detailed discussions of Ambassador Abram's
statement.
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/19 (1992). Mary Concepcion Bautista was unable to attend
the Sub-Commission session. She passed away on 20 September 1992 in Manila.
Id. at 15-18.
Id. at 10.
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/20 & Add. 1 (1992).
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/20/Add. 1 (1992).
Vol. 15
E. Human Rights and Youth
The Sub-Commission received a final report by Dumitru Mazilu (Romania)
on human rights and youth. 100 The report concluded that millions of young
people are exposed to great harm caused by the lack of resources needed
for normal physical and intellectual development, and that positive changes
in recent years have "rekindled the torch of freedom and dignity."' 1 1 Mr.
Mazilu recommended that effective national and international measures
need to put an immediate end to flagrant violations of human rights of
youth.10 2 Mr. Mazilu's report, however, faced criticism from some members
who believed that the report failed to provide an in-depth analysis on numerous important issues.10 3 Mr. Mazilu had faced ill-treatment at the hands
of Romanian authorities in prior years, including an extended detention,
which may have accounted in part for the quality of his study. 04 The SubCommission took the unusual step of neither thanking him nor commenting
on his final report by means of a formal adopted resolution.
F. Investment in South Africa
The Sub-Commission engaged in a substantial discussion on South Africa l0 s
and the changing situation in that country after the presentation of the 1992
annual report on South African investment by Ahmed Khalifa (Egypt). 10 6 Mr.
Khalifa reminded the Sub-Commission that despite allegations to the contrary, apartheid is still very much alive in South Africa and that without
constant pressure, the process of "de-apartheidization" will cease.' 0 7 Mr.
Khalifa expressed disappointment with states that continue to invest in South
100.
101.
102.
103.
104.
105.
106.
107.
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/36 (1992).
Id. at 42.
Id. at 43.
Tian Jin(China) criticized the report for not focusing on employment and for not mentioning negative external causes, such as economic problems in developing countries.
He also stated that the report contained incorrect and misleading information, resting
sometimes on political rumors. EI-Hadji Guiss6 (Senegal) said that Mr. Mazilu's report
had omitted reference to regions of the world where young people had the most problems
and that it had not sufficiently dealt with the problems of youth violence due to unemployment and lack of education. Judith Attah (Nigeria) stated that youth violence and
military registration of youth should have been addressed in more detail. Other members
also took the floor expressing the lack of in-depth analysis in Mr. Mazilu's report. See
U.N. Press Release HR/3130 (7 August 1992).
See Brody, Convery, & Weissbrodt, supra note 1, at 280.
Under agenda item 5(b), the Sub-Commission has examined "adverse consequences for
the enjoyment of human rights of political, military, economic and other forms of assistance
given to the racist and colonialist regime of South Africa."
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/12 & Add.1 (1992).
See U.N. Press Release HR/3133, at 3 (10 August 1992).
1993
Africa without waiting for an interim democratic government. Although Mr.
018
Khalifa received much praise for his most recent report,' he informed the
Sub-Commission that he believed the annual updates should cease, since
publication of a current list of companies investing in South Africa no longer
10 9
dissuaded such investment. The Sub-Commission acceded to his request
and recommended that a new annual report by Judith Sefi Attah (Nigeria)
0
replace Mr. Khalifa's annual report."
V. PROGRESS REPORTS AND STUDIES
Progress reports were received on seven studies: the right to a fair trial;
restitutions for victims of human rights violations; human rights and the
environment; discrimination against HIV-infected persons; peaceful solutions to problems of minorities; the independence of the judiciary; universal
acceptance of human rights instruments; and treaties between states and
indigenous populations.
A. The Right to a Fair Trial
The interim report on the right to a fair trial prepared by Stanislav Chernichenko (Russian Federation) and William Treat (United States) was wellreceived at the Sub-Commission.' I The report is the third in a five-part study
and focused on the interpretation of fair trial norms by the European Commission and Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Commission on and
Court of Human Rights, as well as on the right to amparo, habeas corpus,
2
and similar procedures in various international and domestic fora." In
introducing the report, Mr. Treat spoke of the spirit of cooperation which
had continued between Mr. Chernichenko and himself throughout their
important work. The report also enumerated the sources of fair trial norms,
and dealt with the question of nonderogability, aspects of arrest and detention, the right to be released pending trial, the right to counsel, rights of
108. Sub-Commission members praised Mr. Khalifa on his annual reports. EI-Hadji Guissd
109.
110.
111.
112.
(Senegal) called Mr. Khalifa's report one of the "high points" of the meeting; Daode Zhan
(alternate, China) said that he held Mr. Khalifa "in high esteem" in light of the personal
risks taken by him; and Linda Chavez (United States) commented that Mr. Khalifa has
"made a difference" for change in South Africa. See U.N. Press Release HR3134, at 23 (10 August 1992).
See Sub-Comm'n Res. 1992/6, 1992 Report, supra note 1, at 29.
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/24 & Adds. 1-3 (1992).
Id.
Vol. 15
appeal, and remedies. The addenda provide summaries of cases in which
the right to a fair trial had been violated.
Members and participants engaged in a wide ranging discussion on the
right to a fair trial throughout the world. One particularly compelling presentation was made by the representative of Human Rights Advocates on the
treatment of African-Americans and other minority groups by the police and
the criminal justice system in the United States, with particular reference to
the Rodney King case in Los Angeles.' 1 3 Finally, the Sub-Commission, in its
resolution 1992/21, welcomed the future reports in 1993 and 1994, which
will evaluate national practices and conclude with recommendations for
strengthening the right to a fair trial. The resolution also asked Mr. Fisseha
Yimer (Ethiopia) to serve as principal commentator to next year's fair trial
report, a practice which will become common for all the reports of the SubCommission as the reform measures discussed later in this article become
more widespread.
B. Restitutions for Victims of Human Rights Violations
The Sub-Commission considered a second report from Theo van Boven (the
Netherlands) on the right to restitution, compensation, and rehabilitation for
victims of gross violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms. 1 4
The report included sections on compensation to victims of the Iraqi invasion
of Kuwait, reparation in the context of the complaints of employment discrimination in Romania, reparation under the European Convention for the
Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and impunity in
relation to reparation for victims.' Mr. van Boven stated that in spite of the
existence of relevant international standards, the victim is often overlooked;
113. The statement of Human Rights Advocates (HRA) on 18 August 1992. See also U.N. Press
Release HR/3150, at 3 (18 August 1992). HRA stated that the response to the verdict in
the Los Angeles police brutality case had dramatically brought to the attention of the
world the severity of the existing injustice and the frustration and anger of the minority
community. On 3 March 1991, four white policemen beat an African-American man 56
times while at least a dozen or more officers watched. The trial was moved to a primarily
white judicial district outside Los Angeles, in which, on 29 April 1992, a jury that included
no African-Americans took less than one day to acquit three policemen. The jury failed
to agree on the fourth officer's guilt. A federal civil rights prosecution is still pending
against the officers. The verdict set off riots and a state of emergency was declared in
Los Angeles. See also The Police Verdict: Los Angeles Policemen Acquitted in Taped
Beating, N.Y. Times, 30 April 1992, at Al. Moreover, HRA pointed out that although
African-Americans comprise 12 percent of the US population, 40 percent of those incarcerated in the United States are African-American. HRA also referred to South Africa,
where 40 percent of inmates on death-row are black.
114. U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/8 (1992).
115. Id. at 1.
1993
redress
he asked that more attention and action be directed to obtaining
rights.116
and reparation for victims of gross violations of human
Sub-Commission members congratulated Mr. van Boven for his report
and made several suggestions. For instance, Christy Mbonu (alternate, Nigeria) suggested that Mr. van Boven include the issue of compensation and
reparations to the people of Africa in his next report, and Fatma Ksentini
(Algeria) suggested examining moral compensation for victims of slavery
and trafficking in human beings. The Sub-Commission adopted a resolution
requesting Mr. van Boven to submit his final report in 1993.117
C. Human Rights and the Environment
The Sub-Commission received a progress report on human rights and the
118
environment from Fatma Zohra Ksentini (Algeria). Mrs. Ksentini stated that
the relationship between the environment and human rights implicated other
rights, notably the rights to life, culture, health, peace, and development.
She also noted the close relationship between poverty and environmental
degradation. The report reviewed developments in the recognition of environmental rights as human rights, such as national and regional provisions,
decisions, and comments of governments, regional human rights bodies,
and the United Nations.119 In addition, the report addressed the United
Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in
Brazil, 3-14 June 1992, and noted relevant principles in the Rio Declaration
on Environment and Development.
Several NGOs, including the American Association of Jurists, Human
Rights Advocates, Minnesota Advocates for Human Rights, Minority Rights
Group, the Natural Heritage Institute, and the Sierra Club Legal Defense
Fund welcomed the attention to the issue of human rights and the environment. NGOs also pointed out the increasing human rights abuses associated
with environmental problems, such as deforestation, the toxic waste trade,
and environmental refugees. 12 0 NGOs were also critical of the large mul-
116.
117.
118.
119.
120.
Id. at 9.
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/7 & Add. 1 (1992).
Id.
In a statement on 25 August 1992, Human Rights Advocates (HRA) estimated that by the
end of this century, the number of environmental refugees will exceed 100 million
worldwide. The most vulnerable areas are in Africa and Asia. "The environmental refugee
problem has now reached crisis proportions and is only likely to deepen because these
victims are not protected by international law and are ineligible to receive humanitarian
assistance under traditional refugee programs." Summary Record of the 3 Ist Meeting, at
9, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992SR.31 (1992).
Vol. 15
tinational corporations and international banks that fund ventures harming
the environment. Despite a concern among some members that the SubCommission should not dwell on subjects such as the environment when
so many "mainstream" human rights issues do not receive enough attention,
the Sub-Commission asked Mrs. Ksentini to prepare a further progress report
in 1993 and a final report in 1994.121
D. Discrimination Against HIV-Infected Persons
The Sub-Commission received a progress report from Luis Varela Quiros on
discrimination against HIV-infected people or people with AIDS.122 Mr.
Varela highlighted the current situation of AIDS, as well as the impact of
the disease. 23 The report recommended that strategies to prevent AIDSrelated discrimination combine education with legal protection against discrimination in the enjoyment of human rights.124 NGOs and intergovernmental organizations also presented reports on the continuing discrimination
against HIV-infected individuals or people with AIDS.125 Mr. Varela Quiros
was asked to present his final report on this study in 1993.
E. Minorities
In light of increasing ethnic and religious violence in the world today, including in the former Yugoslavia and the Balkan states of the former Soviet
Union, Asbjorn Eide's (Norway) second progress report on the protection of
minorities received much attention and praise from members and observ121. Sub-Comm'n Res. 1992/31, 1992 Report, supra note 1, at 77.
122. U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/10 (1992). Mr. Varela explained that he was unable to
present a final report before the Sub-Commission as he did not receive enough responses
to his questionnaire to complete the study. See also U.N. Press Release HR/3156, at 3
(21 August 1992).
123. Mr. Varela cites the World Health Organization (WHO) in estimating that, as of early
1992, at least 10-12 million adults and children have been infected with HIV. WHO
estimates that by the year 2000, there will be 30-40 million people infected with the
HIV virus, and that 12-18 million people will develop AIDS. Nearly 90 percent of the
projected HIV infections and AIDS cases will occur in developing countries. U.N. Doc.
E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/10, at 2-3 (1992).
124. Id. at 34.
125. See U.N. Press Release HR/3156, at 4 (21 August 1992). A representative of WHO and
the Global Programme on AIDS noted that discrimination against people infected with
HIV or who have AIDS might be due to the fact that AIDS is a fatal disease with no
treatment, causing the noninfected person to be afraid, and because initially, in developed
countries, HIV/AIDS occurred in groups traditionally discriminated against: gay men,
prostitutes, and drug users. A representative from the ILO explained its collaboration with
WHO on AIDS-related issues. The ILO intended to conduct more information activities
on the social consequences of AIDS in the job market, and the cost of AIDS research
and care in developing countries.
1993
ers. 1 2 6 His report offered new insights into the complex relationship between
self-determination of oppressed peoples, territorial integrity of states, and
minority rights. 127 Mr. Eide's report also coined the phrase "ethno-nationalism," which is loosely defined as a pride or loyalty to one's own ethnic
128
This type of nationalism
group to the exclusion of other ethnic groups.
can be either benign or malignant, but its malignant forms can provoke
as well as the exclusion, segreracism, violence, and political instability,
29
gation, and exploitation of peoples.
Mr. Eide's report presented an analytical framework within which to
evaluate and attempt to resolve the problems suffered and/or caused by
minority groups, including the unique differences between: (1) settled groups
and recent immigrants, 130 (2) groups living compactly together versus groups
31
whose population is dispersed throughout the country, and (3) groups for
whom it is difficult to identify the definitional features that differentiate them
from the population as a whole (for example, religion, language, ethnic or
32
Mr. Eide's report also noted that
cultural identity, or national groups).
three categories of "peoples" possess the right to "self-determination": (1)
people who live in a colonial territory under European power, (2) people
whose territories were annexed after 1945 against their will, and (3) people
in consensual federations which have been formed through voluntary accession by member republics, where such republics have had the consti1 33
Beyond these cases, Mr.
tutional right to withdraw from the federation.
Eide argued34 that a unilateral right to "self-determination" is "extremely
doubtful.'
Many members and NGOs commented on the relevance of Mr. Eide's
report, which identified the dangers of carrying out the concept of self135
determination, on the one hand, and sovereignty, on the other. While
considered
some Western members believed that secession should not be
as a solution,'136 Awn ShawketAl-Khasawneh (Jordan) assumed a distinctively
126. U.N. Doc. EiCN.4/Sub.2/1992/37 (1992). The report also includes responses from various
governments to Mr. Eide's questionnaire in Addendum 1 and replies received from former
Yugoslavia in Addendum 2.
127. Id.
128. U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/37, at 3-4 (1992).
129. Id. at 4.
130. Id. at 13.
131. Id. at 14.
132. Id. at 15.
133. U.N. Doc. _/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/37, at 33-34 (1992).
134. Id. at 33.
135. See U.N. Press Release HR/3160 (26 August 1992) for additional comments.
136. Id. at 2. Claire Palley (United Kingdom) stated that secession should be ruled out as an
unfriendly act contrary to international law. Linda Chavez (United States) complimented
Mr. Eide on his "model report" and stated that in the United States, there is an increasing.
number of secessionist separatist groups, representing both the majority and minority,
and that it was important to examine whether they have a legitimate claim.
Vol. 15
different approach from that of the rest of the Sub-Commission. Mr. AlKhasawneh stated that although there was no UN definition of "self-determination," the right should apply to all peoples, even if it threatened the
territorial integrity of States. 137 He urged the Sub-Commission to find new
and creative solutions and not to feel restricted by its prior resolutions. Mr.
AI-Khasawneh quoted an Egyptian philosopher that "The wisest men are
those who can best interpret their times."' 38
Many NGOs spoke of the human rights abuses against minority groups
in many places, including Albania, the Balkan region, Myanmar, Rwanda,
Turkey, and the former Yugoslavia. 139 Pax Christi International also drew
attention to the "shocking ultimatum" issued by the Georgian authorities to
Abkhazia on 25 August 1992 to use military means to crush the Abkhaz
people, and appealed to the Sub-Commission to take up the matter urgently.140 Mr. Eide's report on minorities also caused some concern from
NGOs that undue criticism of the efforts of oppressed peoples to achieve
self-determination may encourage governments to repress internal insurrec4
tions.' '
The Sub-Commission, in resolution 1992/37, endorsed Mr. Eide's report
and requested him to submit his final report in 1993.142 The resolution also
authorized Mr. Eide to continue his visits to countries at the invitation of
governments. In 1992, Mr. Eide visited Armenia and Azerbaijan to discuss
solutions to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, as well as Georgia, Estonia, and
Latvia to discuss issues related to minorities and nationalities. 143
F. Independence of the Judiciary
The Sub-Commission discussed the second report on the independence of
the judiciary and the protection of practicing lawyers, 144 prepared by Louis
Joinet (France) and proposed that he continue his study of measures to
strengthen the safety and independence of judges and lawyers. The report
provided detailed information on measures and practices adopted by various
countries that are either aimed at strengthening the safeguards of independence or serve to weaken the safeguards. 45 In his conclusions and recommendations, Mr. Joinet stated that there is an obvious cause-and-effect re-
137.
138.
139.
140.
141.
142.
143.
144.
145.
Id. at 4.
Id.
See U.N. Press Release HR/3161 (26 August 1992).
Id. at 5.
Statement of Pax Christi International on 26 August 1992. See also U.N. Press Release
HR/3161, at 5 (26 August 1992).
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/37, at 5-6 (1992).
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/25 & Add.1 (1992).
Id.
1993
lationship between the extent of the shortcomings of the judiciary and the
degree of human rights violations. 46 The report also recommended safeguards which would strengthen the independence of the judiciary and the
legal profession. Interventions by NGOs drew attention to a report released
by the Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers entitled "Attacks
on Justice," which catalogued 447 cases of jurists who had suffered reprisals
47
for carrying out their professional functions.1 Several NGOs, including the
International Commission of Jurists spoke against escalating violence aimed
at judges and lawyers.'4 8 Moreover, Mr. Joinet also expressed concern in
his report for the essentially passive, information-receiving role he must
perform. Since governments send him "positive" examples of the protection
ot judges and lawyers, Mr. Joinet must rely on NGOs to bring "negative"
examples to his attention. As a result, he urged greater publicity of the
applicable standards and mechanisms.
G. Monitoring Progress on the Ratification of Human Rights Instruments
The Sub-Commission received a note from the Secretary-General on the
encouragement of universal acceptance of human rights instruments and
included an updated report on the ratification of various treaties through 25
June 1992. 4 1 Amnesty International noted that no permanent member of
the UN Security Council was a party to all five major human right
instruments'50 (although France and the Russian Federation had ratified or
acceded to all but the Second Optional Protocol), and that only four of the
fifty-three current members of the Commission on Human Rights were parties
15
to the five major human rights instruments. ' Some Sub-Commission members suggested that the United Nations should publish the list of countries
U.N. Doc. ECN.4/Sub.2/1992/25/Add.1, at 2 (1992).
See U.N. Press Release HR/3150, at 1 (18 August 1992).
Id. at 3.
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/1992/27 & Corr.1 (1992).
The five major human rights instruments identified by Amnesty International were: the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel,
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; and the First and Second Optional
Protocols to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Statement of Amnesty
International delivered on 4 August 1992.
151. The four members of the Commission on Human Rights who are parties to all of the five
human rights instruments are: Australia, Finland, the Netherlands, and Portugal. See U.N.
Press Release HR/3127, at 4 (4 August 1992).
Amnesty International is also concerned by the unusually large number of limiting
reservations, understandings, and declarations which accompany the ratification of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights by the United States, in particular
Article 6 of the Covenant which guarantees the fundamental right to life and prohibits
the execution of juvenile offenders, from which no derogation is permitted. See Summary
Record of the 3rd Meeting, at 7, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/SR.3 (1992).
146.
147.
148.
149.
150.
Vol. 15
that have not ratified the many UN conventions, while other members
pointed out that the mere ratification of such instruments did not mean that
the country would necessarily comply with the conventions. 52 The SubCommission adopted a resolution requesting the Chair of the Sub-Commission to appoint, prior to its forty-sixth session, one of its members to report
on the difficulties impeding ratification of, or accession to, the international
human rights instruments and to assess the effectiveness of advisory services
with a view to encouraging universal acceptance of human rights instruments.153
H. Treaties and Agreements Between States and Indigenous Populations
The Sub-Commission also considered a study on treaties, agreements, and
other constructive arrangements between states and indigenous populations,154 which ECOSOC entrusted to Miguel Alfonso Martfnez (Cuba) in
1989.1 s Mr. Alfonso Martfnez's first progress report was submitted this year
and considered some of the research and other activities undertaken thus
far as well as some relevant anthropological and historical considerations.5 6
Once again, Mr. Alfonso Martfnez stressed the need for more time, money,
and information to complete his study.' 5 7 He also expressed disappointment
at receiving only 15 responses to his questionnaire submitted in 1990 to
152. loan Maxim (Romania) insisted that the first step to ensure protection of human rights
was to encourage states to ratify the conventions by having the Secretariat publish the
names of states that had not yet ratified human rights conventions. Similarly, Fatma Ksentini
(Algeria) stated that the encouragement of ratification is the first necessary step before
engaging in application of the conventions; and further indicated that human rights treaties
are enforced by, for example, periodic presentation of reports by states parties. Linda
Chavez (United States) and EI-Hadji Guissd (Senegal), however, pointed out that it would
be a mistake to take the mere ratification of a convention as evidence of compliance
with the spirit of the instrument and that many states which had ratified continued to
violate norms. Mr. Guiss6 suggested that one of the most effective ways of protecting
human rights was for states to incorporate universal norms into their domestic legislation.
See U.N. Press Release HR/3127 (4 August 1992) for complete discussion.
154. U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/CRP.1 (19 August 1992).
155. E.S.C. Res. 1989/77, at 154, U.N. Doc. E/1989/INF/7 (1989).
156. Mr. Alfonso Martinez indicated that the purpose of the present progress report was:
a) to inform the working group and the Sub-Commission about the research and other
activities that have been undertaken; b) to establish some anthropological and historical
premises which appear of importance to the Special Rapporteur; c) to elaborate on some
juridical issues that he considers of prime importance; and d) to review and summarize
a number of cases that have been considered useful to illustrate the vast diversity of
juridical situations existing in the world. See U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/CRP.1, at 2
(1992).
157. During the 1991 session of the working group, some indigenous representatives were
critical of the delays and lack of progress on the study. Mr. Alfonso Martfnez stressed the
need for time and money at the 1991 session as well. See Reierson & Weissbrodt, supra
1993
various governmental, nongovernmental, inter-governmental, and indigenous organizations, and appealed to all parties to cooperate in order to
complete his final report by 1995.
VI. ANNUALLY UPDATED REPORTS
The Sub-Commission considered two annually updated reports in its 1992
session: reports on states of emergency and on investment in South Africa.
A. States of Emergency
l s8
The fifth annual report on states of emergency took on special significance
because of the continuing crisis in the former Yugoslavia. The report, prepared by Leandro Despouy (Argentina), identified eighty countries, nearly
half of the entire membership of the United Nations, including nations with
a long democratic tradition, which have declared states of emergency since
1 January 1985. l s9 Mr. Despouy urged the close examination of and assistance to the countries comprising the former Soviet Union and noted that
none of these newly independent states have yet adopted legislation gov60
erning rights and obligations during emergencies.1 Mr. Despouy also noted
recent events in Peru where the parliament has been dissolved and the
Constitution was partially suspended on 5 April 1992, and appreciated the
prompt notification of this development by the Peruvian Permanent Mission
6
in Geneva, as well as the promise by Peru to call elections. ' The SubCommission asked Mr. Despouy to continue updating his report and drafting
guidelines for the protection of human rights during states of emergency, in
62
particular the question of nonderogable rights. It was also recommended
emergency be discussed at
that the subject of human rights and states of 163
the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights.
B. Apartheid and South Africa
The Sub-Commission adopted a resolution which would change the mandate
of the special rapporteur on South Africa, in particular terminating the annual
158.
159.
160.
161.
162.
163.
note 1, at 268. This year, the Sub-Comm'n Dec. 1992/110 regretted that Mr. Alfonso
Martfnez was not able to submit his report on time to the 10th session of the Working
Group on Indigenous Populations.
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/23 (1992).
Id. at 3. In 1991, sixty-one countries reported states of emergency.
Id. at 28.
Id. at 32.
Id. at 62.
Vol. 15
list of companies investing in South Africa. Judith Attah (Nigeria) was selected
to continue to monitor the transition to democracy in South Africa.164
VII. NEW INITIATIVES AND WORKING PAPERS
The Sub-Commission considered two new initiatives: (1) measures to combat
racism and (2) human rights and scientific and technological developments.
In addition, the Sub-Commission received working papers on the right to
adequate housing, population transfers, impunity for human rights violations,
the relationship between human rights and international peace, privatization
of prisons, extreme poverty, human rights violations as international crime,
and cultural and intellectual property of indigenous peoples.
A. Measures to Combat Racism
The Sub-Commission received a report from the Secretary-General on measures to combat racism and racial discrimination. 16- The report included an
overview of current trends as to racism, racial discrimination, intolerance,
and xenophobia, including organized racism, employment and housing discrimination, and the situation of indigenous peoples. 66 The report concluded
that there was a resurgence of racism and xenophobia throughout the world,
1 67
particularly in Europe, the United States, and Australia.
In light of the resurgence of manifestations of racial discrimination
around the world,' 68 twenty-one members of the Sub-Commission co-sponsored a resolution on racism and racial discrimination recommending that
the Commission on Human Rights appoint a thematic special rapporteur to
address contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, and xenophobia. 169 The resolution also recommended that the General Assembly take
steps to launch a third decade to combat racism and racial discrimination,
to begin in 1993.170
B. Science and Technology
In a consensus decision, the Sub-Commission adopted a proposal by Stanislav Chernichenko (Russian Federation) to consider the possibility of elab-
164.
165.
166.
167.
168.
169.
170.
For a complete discussion see supra note 73 and accompanying text.
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/11 (1992).
Id.
Id. at 41.
See, e.g., U.N.Doc. E/CN.4/sub.21992/NGO/1 (1992).
Id. at 29.
1993
orating new human rights standards relating to scientific developments which
can affect the genetic structure of human beings.' 71 This issue will be discussed under the agenda item "Human rights and scientific and technological
developments."
C. Working Paper on Housing
The Sub-Commission received a working paper on the right to adequate
housing from Rajinder Sachar (India). 172 The working paper includes a discussion on the causes of the international housing crisis, 173 the substance
and nature of the right to adequate housing,174 the legal basis of housing
rights,' 7s and individual and group entitlement to housing. 176 The working
paper also stated that housing is a "fundamental right related to a primary
human need," and its lack "must be seen as an injustice." 177 Mr. Sachar
concludes that there is a need of a long-term study on the right to adequate
housing. 178 The Sub-Commission decided to1 79appoint Mr. Sachar as Special
Rapporteur to complete the two-year study.
D. Working Paper on Population Transfers
Claire Palley (United Kingdom) presented a working paper on the human
rights dimensions of population transfers. 180 Population transfers and their
consequences are relevant to nearly all UN bodies, including the Security
Council, as shown by its concern with recent events in the former Yugoslavia
and the former USSR, and the UNHCR. Numerous NGOs addressed the
serious consequences of population transfers. 181The working paper proposed
171. Sub-Comm'n Dec. 1992/104, 1992 Report, supra note 1, at 95.
172. U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/15 (1992).
173. Id. at 4-11. The causes stated in the working paper were failures of government and
development policies; housing discrimination; environmental health; disasters; withholding of information critical to housing; exploitation in the housing sphere; speculation
and the commoditization of housing; forced evictions; armed conflict; criminalization
of housing; structural adjustment programs and debt; poverty; and homelessness.
174. Id. at 11.
175. Id. at 12.
176. Id. at 17.
177. Id. at 3.
178. Id. at 20.
180. U.N. Doc. ECN.4/Sub.2/1992/WP.1 (19 August 1992).
181. In awritten statement, the International Human Rights Law Group noted forced population
transfers in over twenty countries. For example, the Law Group discussed the increasing
minority of Tibetans in their capital, Lhasa; the deportation of thousands of Baits to other
Soviet territories; the additional housing units built by the Israeli government in the West
Vol. 15
that a study be initiated to provide guidance to governments and international
bodies as to the limits of lawful policies on population transfer, including
the implantation of settlers and settlements.' 82 The study would provide
principles to govern measures for dealing with the consequences of past
population transfers, standards of lawfulness, and mechanisms providing
deterrence against improper population transfers.' 18 3 The Sub-Commission,
by consensus resolution, appointed Awn Shawkat AI-Khasawneh (Jordan)
and Ribot Hatano
(Japan) as co-rapporteurs to prepare a study on population
84
transfers.'
E. Working Paper on Impunity
The Sub-Commission received a working paper on impunity prepared by
EI-Hadji Guiss6 (Senegal) and Louis Joinet (France)."8 " The paper analyzed
the legal mechanisms and the practices that facilitate impunity and thus
result in human rights violations. The paper also discussed measures to avoid
giving impunity to human rights violators. Moreover, the report proposed
that anti-impunity measures be organized into the following four categories:
(1) the establishment of specific standards; (2) the pursuit of effective investigations; (3) bringing the perpetrators to court; and (4) measures such
as purges, exile, political asylum, and extradition. 816 Mr. Guiss6 and Mr.
Joinet sought approval for a study to explore in greater depth the question
of impunity as a violation of the right to justice recognized by the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights. The Sub-Commission agreed to appoint Mr. Guiss6 and Mr.
87
Joinet as co-rapporteurs to prepare a study on impunity.
182.
183.
184.
185.
186.
187.
Bank; Indonesia's massive transmigration program to resettle millions of people from Java
to the outer islands; and the expulsion of the Greek Cypriots by the Turkish government
in Cyprus. U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/NG0/2, at 2 (1992).
In another NGO written statement, the International Federation for the Protection of
Ethnic, Religious, Linguistic and other Minorities added many other examples of population transfer cases: the transfer of Russians into Abkhazia; the removal of aboriginal
tribes from their traditional lands by the Australian government; the Serbian population
transfer policy against the Albanian population in Kosovo; the mass displacement of
Assyrians into Iraq during World War I and their subsequent threat of elimination by the
Iraqi government; the transfer of Papuans into Bougainville; the settlement of Bengali
people in the lands of the Jumma people in the Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh,
and the depopulation of Kurds in the strategic border areas of Turkey and Iraq. See
generally U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/NGO/3 (1992).
U.N. Doc. F.CN.4/Sub.2/1992/WP.1, at 10 (1992).
Id. at 11.
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/18 (1992).
Id.
1993
F. Other Working Papers
The Sub-Commission also received working papers on human rights and
peace, privatization of prisons, extreme poverty, human rights violations as
an international crime, and cultural and intellectual property of indigenous
peoples.
The Sub-Commission received a working paper from Murlidhar Bhandare (India) on the interrelationship between international peace and human
rights, particularly the right to life. 188 The paper stated that a mechanism
must be established for securing fundamental rights without impinging on
the sovereignty of states. The Sub-Commission requested Mr. Bhandare to
submit a supplement to his working paper in 1994.189
The Sub-Commission also received a working paper from the SecretaryGeneral on privatization of prisons. 190 The paper noted that although the
Secretary-General had sent letters requesting states and intergovernmental
and nongovernmental organizations to submit their views on the question
of privatization, only four replies were received by the due date. 191 Taking
into account the Secretary-General's working paper, as well as a working
paper submitted by Miguel Alfonso Martfnez (Cuba) in 1991,192 the SubCommission requested Claire Palley (United Kingdom) to prepare a preliminary report for a special study which may be undertaken on privatization
of prisons to be submitted to the Sub-Commission in 1993.193
The Secretary-General submitted a Note to the Sub-Commission which
included a report prepared by the International Movement ATD Fourth World,
a nongovernmental organization, on extreme poverty.'9 4 The report focused
on the contributions of this NGO to the understanding of extreme poverty,
as well as the contributions of Father Joseph Wresinski, founder of the NGO.
The Sub-Commission decided to appoint Leandro Despouy (Argentina) as
Special Rapporteur on the question of human rights and extreme poverty
and requested him to submit a preliminary report in 1993.19s
The Sub-Commission received a working paper from Stanislav Chernichenko (Russian Federation) on gross and large-scale human rights violations
as international crime.' 96 The working paper stated that criminal proceedings
should be brought against persons who have used the state as an instrument
188.
189.
190.
191.
192.
193.
194.
195.
196.
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/32 and Corr.1 (1992).
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/21 (1992).
Id. at 2. The Secretary-General received replies from Cuba, Egypt, Turkey, and the Friends
World Committee for Consultation (Quakers).
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1991/56 (1992).
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/50 (1992).
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/199251 (1992).
Vol. 15
for committing an international crime, and that gross and large-scale human
rights violations could be categorized as international crime in a declaration
adopted by the General Assembly. Mr. Chernichenko suggested that a short
draft declaration setting forth general principles could be drafted by the SubCommission. 197 The Sub-Commission, in a consensus decision, decided to
authorize Mr. Chernichenko to submit a detailed working paper on the
subject in 1993.198
The Secretary-General submitted a report on the protection of the intellectual property of indigenous peoples.1 99 The report concludes that the
protection of intellectual property of indigenous peoples is complex and
unresearched, and that a greater understanding of the concerns of indigenous
peoples on this issue may be needed before specific legal remedies are
200
determined.
VIii. WORKING GROUPS OF THE SUB-COMMISSION
The Sub-Commission has three working groups that meet prior to the start
of every session. In 1992, the Working Group on Indigenous Populations
met for two weeks immediately preceding the session. The Working Group
on Contemporary Forms of Slavery held its seventeenth session from 4 to
13 May 1992. The Working Group on Communications meets in private
session for up to two weeks prior to the Sub-Commission. It considers information about gross violations of human rights in specific countries and
20 1
confidentially refers communications to the Sub-Commission as a whole.
The Sub-Commission also has a sessional working group on detention.
A. WORKING GROUP ON INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS
The Working Group on Indigenous Populations met for its tenth annual
session during the two weeks preceding the start of the Sub-Commission
session. 20 2 The Working Group's mandates are: (1) to review developments
Id. at 2.
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/30 (1992).
Id. at 7.
The confidential, country-specific communications process is discussed supra, notes 7679 and accompanying text.
202. Members of the 1992 working group were Miguel Alfonso Martfnez (Cuba), Judith Attah
(Nigeria), Erica Irene-Daes (Greece), Ribot Hatano (Japan), and Danilo Tirk (Slovenia)
who was replaced by Stanislav Chernichenko (Russian Federation) at the session. At its
first meeting on 20 July 1992, the Working Group re-elected by acclamation Erica-lrene
Daes as Chairperson/Rapporteur for the eighth time. See U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/
33, at 5 (1992).
197.
198.
199.
200.
201.
1993
pertaining to the human rights of indigenous peoples, and (2) to undertake
standard-setting. The session is an open forum; observer governments and
NGOs in consultative status at the United Nations attended the session, as
well as interested persons and representatives of indigenous peoples. A
voluntary fund established in 1985 pays travel and living expenses for many
representatives of indigenous peoples and organizations, so they can attend
the Working Group. This year, the Voluntary Fund enabled forty-one indigenous peoples from nineteen countries to attend the session. 20 3 In all, approximately 615 people attended, including 126 representatives of indigenous peoples, nations, and organizations, as well as 250 individual
participants. The chairperson of the Working Group, Erica Irene Daes
(Greece), described her successful visit to New Zealand, in particular her
meeting with the Queen of the Maori people. Mrs. Daes also attended the
First World Indigenous Youth Conference held in Quebec, Canada, in July
1992.
A major project of the Working Group for the past several years has
been the drafting of a Universal Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples. 20 4 The Working Group made significant progress by completing the
first reading of the draft declaration and progressing substantially in the
second reading. The draft declaration deals with the rights of indigenous
peoples to self-determination; to the collective right to exist in peace and
security and to be protected against genocide; to maintain and develop their
distinct ethnic and cultural characteristics; to revive and practice their cultural identity; to teach their own spiritual and religious traditions; to use
their own language; to benefit from all levels of education, including access
to education in their own language; to use and access mass media in their
own language; to be granted adequate financial and technical assistance
through states; to own, control, and use the lands and territories they have
traditionally occupied; to be granted restitution or just and fair compensation
for lands confiscated or occupied without their consent; to enjoy protection
and rehabilitation of the environment; to enjoy protection of their intellectual
property; to maintain and develop their traditional economic structures
within their territories; to receive humanitarian assistance from states; to
implement all health, housing, and other social programs affecting them; to
participate fully at the state level in national and international matters; to
enjoy autonomy in their internal affairs; to determine the responsibilities of
individuals to their own communities consistent with human rights norms;
to maintain and develop contacts with other indigenous communities; to
have treaties and other agreements respected; and to utilize mutually acceptable dispute resolution procedures. Mrs. Daes stated that the Working
203. U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/33, at 35 (1992).
204. U.N. Doc. EICN.4/Sub.2/1992/28 (1992).
Vol. 15
Group had a moral obligation to finalize the draft declaration for the International Year for the World's Indigenous People in 1993.
During the discussion on the Declaration, certain issues were regarded
as particularly important. Many observer governments put forward strong
reservations to the inclusion of references to "self-determination." 2° In particular, Canada stated that it would favor "self-determination" only within
the framework of existing nation-states. 20 6 Similarly, the representative from
the United States stated that the scope of the right to "self-determination"
needs to be carefully defined since it might be construed as a right to full
independence as a separate group, and that his government would not be
able to accept this interpretation. 20 7 Representatives from some Scandinavian
countries stressed that great caution was needed and urged that the term
"self-determination" be qualified carefully. 208 In general, observer governments suggested that "self-determination" should include a wide range of
autonomous decision-making, short of full independence as a separate state.
Representatives of indigenous peoples, however, maintained that the right
to self-determination was an inherent and inalienable right of all nations
and peoples.20 9 The Chair of the Working Group expressed her view that
the principle of self-determination was used in the draft Declaration in its
internal character, that is, short of encouraging the formation of independent
states. 210 Another controversial issue included the reservations expressed by
observer governments to the term "peoples." 2 1 The representative of the
United States stated that a definition of "indigenous peoples" is desirable
and that if the term remained in the declaration, it should be defined in a
manner equivalent to that contained in Article 1 of the International Labor
Organization's Convention No. 169, which makes clear that "peoples" does
205. The term "self-determination" is included in operative paragraph 1 of the draft declaration.
A similar concept of "autonomy" appears in draft operative paragraph 25.
206. Oral statement of the representative of Canada on 21 July 1992.
207. Statement of the representative of the United States on 21 July 1992.
208. The representative of Norway, speaking on behalf of Denmark, Finland, and Sweden,
stressed that great caution was necessary in relation to the term "self-determination." See
U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/33, at 17 (1992).
209. Statement of Mr. Lazaro Pary of Movement Tupay Katari (Bolivia) on 22 July 1992. A
representative from Amazonia stated that self-determination had no meaning if indigenous
people are not able to control their lands. There was a general discussion about whether
the draft declaration should include a "shopping list" of rights or whether it should take
a more general approach. For example, in a statement on 22 July 1992, Mick Dodson
of the Northern Land Council thought that there should be both a general statement and
a "shopping list"; he proposed that "Indigenous Peoples have the right to self-government.
Accordingly, indigenous peoples shall have control over, among other things ... (the
shopping list to include right to self-government, environment, tax, employment, criminal
justice system, and so on)."
210. U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/33, at 17 (1992).
211. Id. at 19.
1993
not imply the right of self-determination. 212 Other disputed issues included
the proper scope of "lands," "territories," "compensation," and "autonomy."
The Working Group also considered a study on treaties, agreements,
and other constructive arrangements between states and indigenous peoples. 21 3 The Working Group also had before it a report from the UN Technical
Conference on Practical Experience in the Realization of Sustainable and
Environmentally Sound Self-Development of Indigenous Peoples, held in
May 1992 in Santiago, Chile. 21 4 In addition, the study of the ownership and
control of the cultural and intellectual property of indigenous people will
be prepared by Mrs. Daes and submitted to the Sub-Commission at its 1993
session .21-5
The year 1993 has been designated by General Assembly Resolution
46/128 as the "International Year for the World's Indigenous Peoples." The
Working Group stressed the importance of meaningful participation in the
activities of the International Year, which has as its theme "Indigenous Peoples - A New Partnership." 216 The Working Group called for generous contributions to the voluntary fund established to support UN activities during
the International Year.
In a statement on 31 July 1992, the representative of Australia, Robert
Tickner, critically analyzed the future role of the Working Group. 21 7 The
Australian government recognized that the existence of a forum for indigenous peoples is a "continuing reminder to the international community of
the collective, social, economic, cultural and political concerns of indigenous peoples." 218 The government proposed that the working group: enhance
its review of developments; broaden its approach to standard-setting to
include analytical commentary and ongoing suggestions; review other international standard-setting activity; continue to prepare appropriate and
well-targeted studies; and promote human rights by making recommendations of technical assistance from other UN human rights programs to national
institutions and organizations. 219 In addition, the Australian government rec-
212. See id. and oral statement of US representative on 21 July 1992. See also Convention
(No. 169) Concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in independent Countries, 27 June
1989, reprinted in 15 Okla. City U. L. Rev. 237 (1990).
213. See supra notes 154-157 and accompanying text.
214. U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/31 & Add.1 (1992).
216. U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/1992/33, at 41 (1992). A working paper by Asbjorn Eide (Norway)
and Christy Mbonu (alternate, Nigeria) in 1991 outlined suggestions for activities during
the International Year. See U.N. Doc. ECN.4/Sub.2/1991/39 (1991).
217. Statement by Robert Tickner, Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs,
Australia, at the 10th session of the Working Group on Indigenous Populations, at Geneva
on 31 July 1992.
218. Id.
219. Id.
Vol. 15
ommended that, once the Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
is adopted, the Working Group should encourage governments to report on
their effort to give effect to its provisions. Finally, the Australian government
stated that the Draft Declaration should be provisionally adopted by the
Working Group in 1993 as a major contribution to the International Year,
after which it should be submitted to the 1994 session of the Commission
on Human Rights.
B. Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery
The Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery held its seventeenth
session 4-13 May 1992.220 Unlike its last few sessions, this year there was
no central theme for its deliberations, instead choosing to devote its session
to an overall evaluation of its activities. Participants discussed a broad range
of issues, including the prevention of the sale of children, child prostitution,
and child pornography; the exploitation of child labor and eradication of
debt bondage, slavery, and the slave trade; the elimination of the slaverylike practices of apartheid and colonialism; child soldiers; and investigation
of the continuing reports of commercial practices of removing organs from
children for black-market transplant purposes. The Working Group also
decided to begin to draft at its next session principles to combat sex tourism,
as well as to examine new221topics such as sexual harassment and institutionalized sexual violence.
Two topics were stressed during the Sub-Commission's general debate
under this agenda item. Widespread concern was expressed over the reports
of the abduction of over 200,000 Korean women ("comfort women") by the
Japanese Imperial forces during World War II to be used as sex slaves, as
well as the abduction of 1.5 million men to work in hard labor.222 NGO
observers sought restitution, compensation, and rehabilitation for these vic-
220. U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/34 (1992). The composition of the 1992 Working Group
was as follows: Shawket AI-Khasawneh (Jordan), Marianela Ferriol Echevarria (alternate,
Cuba), Fatma Zohra Ksentini (Algeria), loan Maxim (Romania), and Claire Palley (United
Kingdom).
222. See U.N. Press Release HR/3131, at 3-5 (7August 1992). NGOs dominated the discussion
during this session on the issue of "Comfort Women." The Commission of the Churches
on International Affairs made a statement on Korean comfort women who had been used
as sex slaves for the Japanese Army during 1932-1945, together with women from other
Asian countries. In addition to the sexual enslavement, an uncountable number of comfort
women were killed, or simply abandoned by the Japanese Army. A representative of the
Democratic People's Republic of Korea also brought attention to the plight of Korean
women who had been abducted during World War 11"to serve as sexual slaves and on
whom the Japanese government had been unable to provide information despite repeated
appeals." Id.
1993
tims. Although the Japanese government has officially recognized its involvement in this affair,223 the government claimed that by virtue of a 1965
Agreement between Japan and the Republic of Korea, the latter had abanno
doned all claims, including those of individual Koreans. Accordingly, 22
1
Japan.
from
compensation
claim
to
right
legal
individual Korean had any
NGOs also addressed the 15 to 21 million inmates reportedly held in labor
importance of the Sub-Commission's conreform camps in China and the
22
.
situation.
this
of
tinued review
The Working Group reviewed the Secretary-General's updated report
on the recruitment of children into governmental and nongovernmental
armed forces. 226 In compliance with Sub-Commission resolution 1991/34,
governments, UN bodies, specialized agencies, intergovernmental agencies,
and nongovernmental organizations were requested to provide information
on the recruitment of children into the armed forces, and the Working Group
had received 22 replies as of its 1992 session. According to one NGO, there
are tens of thousands of children under 18 years of age fighting alongside
adult soldiers.2 27 While most of these situations occur in developing counEuropean and North American countries also engage in similar
tries, several
228
practices.
223. On 6 July 1992, the Japanese government officially acknowledged that its military had
recruited and organized tens of thousands of women in a vast network of governmentrun brothels for Japanese soldiers during World War II, after repeated denials by Prime
Minister Kiichi Miyazawa and his officials that these brothels existed. "Japanese officials
said they were searching for a way to provide financial aid for the Korean women, but
they declined to use the term compensation. But details were vague, and it was unclear
what the Government would do about women in the Philippines, Indonesia, China and
other nations who were also forced into brothels." Japan Admits It Ran Army Brothels
During War, N.Y.Times, July 7,1992, at Al. In a right of reply statement, the representative
of Japan, Tetsuo Ito, expressed the government's sincere apology and remorse to all those
who had undergone pain and suffering. Mr. Ito said that as a result of a study conducted
by his government since December 1991, it had been confirmed that there had been
some government involvement "in sonle areas." See U.N. Press Release HR/3133, at 6
(10 August 1992).
224. Summary Record of the 7th Meeting, at 7, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/SR.7 (1992).
225. A Chinese student who was present near Tiananmen Square in Beijing on the evening
of 4 June 1989, spoke compellingly about those in detention in China. He cited a book
by Harry Wu entitled "Lao Gai - The Chinese Gulag" (published by Westview Press,
1992) which set the total number of inmates at "labor reform camps" in China between
15 to 21 million. There were apparently three categories of persons in these camps:
convicted criminals sentenced by courts, persons subject to re-education through administrative processes, and forced job placement. See U.N. Press Release HR/3131, at 4
(7 August 1992). See also Summary Record of the 7th Meeting, at 7, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/
Sub.2/1992/SR.7 (1992).
226. U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/35 & Add.1 (1992).
227. Statement of the Friends World Committee for Consultation (Quakers), U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/
Sub.2/1992/35, at 8 (1992).
228. Id. Several governments in Europe and North America subsidize military training for
persons under the age of 18 years and allow boys, and sometimes girls, of 16 and 17
years to enlist voluntarily in the armed forces. The United Kingdom continues to recruit
Vol. 15
The Sub-Commission adopted two resolutions on contemporary forms
of slavery. The first resolution welcomed the parent body's decision to extend
the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the sale of children (Vitit
Muntarbhorn) to three years, and suggested that he be asked to pay special
attention to the problems of: trafficking in children; organ transplantation;
use of child labor; disappearances, purchase, and sale of children; adoptions
for commercial and exploitative purposes; child prostitution; and children
229
in armed conflicts.
The resolution also asked the Commission to consider
appointing a new special rapporteur to permit the Sub-Commission to update
its 1981 study on the exploitation of child labor, and in particular to extend
the study to the problem of debt bondage. 230 The second resolution sought
legal clarification of the validity and effect of treaty reservations, in light of
the fact that over twenty of the 107 states parties to the Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women have asserted
more than eighty reservations. 23' The Sub-Commission requested the Secretary-General to seek the views of the Committee on the Elimination of
Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and the Commission on the Status
of Women concerning the desirability of obtaining an advisory opinion from
the International Court of Justice on extensive treaty reservations. Overall,
the Sub-Commission praised the report of the Working Group and commended Interpol's offer to assist the Working Group by monitoring relevant
violations.
C. Working Group on Detention
The Working Group on Detention convened on 5-6 August 1992.232 The
report of the Working Group included an annual review of developments
concerning human rights of persons subjected to detention or imprisonment,
habeas corpus, the death penalty, juvenile justice, and privatization of prisons. The Working Group also considered a working paper on habeas corpus
and amparo in the United States and discussed the death penalty, particularly
as imposed on persons less than eighteen years of age. In 1991, Amnesty
International informed the working group that it would no longer provide
information for the Secretary-General's annual reports on detention because
229.
230.
231.
232.
persons under 18 years in the armed forces. While the United Kingdom refrains from
sending children on active duty to Northern Ireland, it did send young recruits to participate
in the Falklands/Malvinas conflict and in the recent Persian Gulf War, where soldiers
under 18 were killed. Id.
Id. at 22.
See Repolt of the Working Group on Detention, U.N. Doc. EICN.4/Sub.2/1992/22 (1992).
1993
the report omits the names of specific countries. 233 As a result of Amnesty
International's action, the annual report on detention was quite short and
uninformative. The issue of whether the annual report on detention should
be revised or discontinued has not yet been resolved.
IX. REFORM OF THE SUB-COMMISSION'S WORK
Once again the Sub-Commission, during its forty-fourth session, engaged in
intense discussions on how to reform its methods of work. The self-examination was prompted in large part by increased criticism from some members
of the Commission on Human Rights. 234 One indicator of the importance
of the reform issue was the comment made by Morris Abram, the US ambassador to the United Nations in Geneva, during the 1991 Sub-Commission
session. 2 3 An independent newsletter 236 distributed at the United Nations
reported that Ambassador Abram had suggested in a recent law review article
and during a 17 July 1991 press conference that the Sub-Commission be
abolished. 237 Later, however, the next issue of the newsletter briefly noted
that Ambassador Abram was not actually proposing the complete abolition
of the Sub-Commission. 23 8 Another example of concern regarding the work
of the Sub-Commission is illustrated by the statement of Ronald Walker
(Australia), who spoke to the Sub-Commission in his capacity as the 1992
Vice-Chair of the Commission on Human Rights. 239 In a statement on 18
August 1992, Mr. Walker remarked that the Commission was concerned
over the duplication of work between the two bodies and that more coordination was needed. He noted that the Commission, through its resolutions
and debates, had offered several suggestions to streamline the work of the
Sub-Commission, and had reiterated the importance of preserving the impartiality and independence of its members. He also stressed the importance
of completing authorized studies before embarking on new ones, as well as
233. Reierson & Weissbrodt, supra note 1, at 260 (1991).
234. See id. at 270. A common criticism was that the Sub-Commission duplicated the work
of the Commission and spent too much time discussing human rights violations in specific
countries. See also Penny Parker & David Weissbrodt, Major Developments at the UN
Commission on Human Rights in 1991, 13 Hum. Rts. Q. 573, 607 (1991).
235. Reierson & Weissbrodt, supra note 1, at 271.
236. Sub-Commission Must Go, Says US Ambassador, 1 On The Record 1 (23 July 1991).
237. In the article, Ambassador Abram charged that the Sub-Commission "spends most of its
time examining country-specific human rights situations and generating studies and resolutions of marginal utility ... many of them reaching far beyond its mandate." Morris
Abram, Human Rights and the United Nations: Past as Prologue, 4 Harv. Hum. Rts. J.
70, 80 (1991). See also Reierson & Weissbrodt, supra note 1, at 272.
238. Palais Pulse, 2 On The Record 12 (26 July 1991).
239. U.N. Press Release HR/3149, at 2-3 (18 August 1992).
Vol. 15
reducing the number of Sub-Commission decisions and resolutions. 240
In light of these past and present criticisms, the Sub-Commission redoubled its efforts in 1992 to reform its methods of work. LouisJoinet (France)
introduced the report of the inter-sessional working group which was specially formed to study this problem and had met before the Sub-Commission
convened in 1992.241 The working group recommended improving coordination with other UN organs, including the Commission on Human Rights;
restructuring the agenda to improve its working methods; the elaboration
of a procedure to monitor the implementation of recommendations in the
Sub-Commission's reports and studies; and strengthening the independence
24 2
of the experts of the Sub-Commission.
Immediately after Mr. Joinet's presentation early in the Sub-Commission's 1992 session, the Sub-Commission plunged into a debate regarding
whether a sessional working group should be established to discuss further
the methods of work, or whether to consider the subject only in plenary.243
After a discussion on procedure which appeared to result in much confusion
among Sub-Commission members, the Sub-Commission decided to establish
a sessional working group, but it postponed its plenary discussion until the
last week of the session. Then, in a late-night session during the last week
of the Sub-Commission, Claire Palley (United Kingdom) proposed and the
Sub-Commission agreed to resume its discussion on reform in closed session
(under Rule 39).244 Therefore, the discussions and negotiations leading to
the final draft resolution on reform were largely confidential and members
did not comment publicly on the proposed draft resolution during the brief
general discussion which was reconvened in plenary. As a result, there was
little opportunity for NGO participation or public scrutiny in the Sub-Commission's discussion of the reform of its methods of work.
240. Id. Mr. Walker further stated that there was no need for the "proliferation of studies" from
the Sub-Commission in fields in which the Commission was active and that the SubCommission should focus on specific human rights issues. In regards to its methods of
work, Mr. Walker stated that the Commission supported the work of the inter-sessional
Working Group on Methods of Work (discussed infra notes 241-242 and accompanying
text) and looked forward to their proposals.
241. U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/3 (1992). The inter-sessional working group consisted of
Stanislav Chernichenko (Russian Federation), Leandro Despouy (Argentina), Ribot Hatano
(Japan), Louis Joinet (France), and Fisseha Yimer (Ethiopia). Mr. Joinet was the Chair of
the Working Group and Mr. Yimer was the Rapporteur. The Working Group held a session
of nine meetings at Geneva from 11-15 May 1992. Id. at 3.
242. Id.
243. See Summary Record of the 2nd and 3rd Meetings, U.N. Docs. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/SR.2
& SR.3 (1992), for a complete discussion. For example, the Chair of the Sub-Commission,
Mr. Alfonso Martinez (Cuba), having stepped down from his chair to voice his views on
the issue, said that Commission Resolution 1992/66 "contained nothing that prevented
the Sub-Commission from creating an open-ended working group to consider the report
of the inter-sessional Working Group and to make its findings known to the plenary."
SR.3 at 2-3.
244. Statement of Claire Palley on 25 August 1992.
1993
The inter-sessional Working Group on the Methods of Work had prepared
245
The
a draft resolution, which it invited the Sub-Commission to adopt.
resolution proposed new rules for the preparation of studies, the submission
and adoption of resolutions and decisions, the scheduling of meetings, the
246
Stanallocation of speaking time, and certain transitional arrangements.
islav Chernichenko (Russian Federation) submitted an addendum to the
above report Which proposed that the Sub-Commission refrain from discussing specific country situations, except for illustrative purposes, and that
no resolutions be adopted on specific countries if already being considered
under the 1503 confidential procedure, or if such countries are already being
247
studied by a special rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights.
In its closed session, the Sub-Commission reviewed the reform resolution, and then, in a public session, it adopted the resolution, to take effect
at the forty-fifth session in 1993 .248 The resolution implements several significant changes in the Sub-Commission's current procedures. Principal reforms include limiting the number of studies to thirteen; requiring that a
"preparatory document" be submitted before any new study is undertaken;
requiring that the preparatory document include a discussion of the relevance
and timeliness of the study; limiting the period of time to complete a study
to three years, absent special circumstances; limiting most studies to one
principal author; directing the appointment of commentators to analyze each
study; coordinating resolutions and decisions by monitoring their numbers
with historical patterns, and by substituting resolutions where appropriate
with declarations from the Chair; urging the withdrawal of any draft resolution or decision which does not have at least four co-sponsor signatures;
asking the Secretariat to inform the Sub-Commission on any actions taken
on studies and recommendations from the prior year; allocating speaking
time among Sub-Commission members, governments, and NGOs; beginning
all meetings on time unless postponement is requested due to a lack of a
quorum; and affording the Chair more flexibility in opening or holding open
agenda items. It should be noted that a portion of the Working Group report
which defined more particularly the role of alternate members of the Sub-
246. Id.
247. U.N. Doc. EICN.4/Sub.2/1992/3/Add.1 (1992). For example, in 1992, this proposal might
have meant that the resolutions on Guatemala, Haiti, Iran, Iraq, and South Africa would
not have been permitted.
248. Sub-Comm'n Res. 1992/8, 1992 Report, supra note 1, at 37. It is unclear whether the
Sub-Commission adopted the Guidelines on its method of work, or whether it adopted
the resolution only. Sub-Commission Resolution 1992/8, in paragraph two, states:
2. Also Decides to annex to the present resolution the document entitled "Guidelines which the
Sub-Commission adopted at its forty-fourth session concerning its methods of work, pursuant to
paragraphs 6 and 7 of the Commission on Human Rights resolution 1992."
See Sub-Comm'n Res. 1992/8, 1992 Report, supra note 1, at 31.
Vol. 15
Commission 249 was not included in the final resolution, therefore, the role
and participation of alternate members has been left unclear at the SubCommission. 25 0 The resolution was also amended to reflect a commitment
to discuss dropped items next year, such as Mr. Chernichenko's proposals.
In summary, there was general agreement among members and participants that the Sub-Commission was in need of significant reform, that the
Sub-Commission's resolution had achieved considerable progress, and that
the structural problems should be addressed. Some of the experts were
particularly concerned that studies be more evenly distributed among experts, that the work of the Sub-Commission had grown so large that its
members could no longer read and evaluate all the material disseminated
during the session or to deliberate with one another regarding the material,
and that NGO interventions were becoming increasingly time-consuming
and disruptive to effective Sub-Commission deliberations. 251 In the end,
however, the Sub-Commission members praised Chairman Miguel Alfonso
Martfnez (Cuba) on his effective management of this year's session, which
had fewer extended sessions than prior years and no speakers who exceeded
the applicable time limits. It remains to be seen how the implementation of
the new reforms will improve the work of the Sub-Commission in the future.
In the midst of this debate, the Sub-Commission also discussed diplomatic immunity for its members, following an unpleasant incident experienced by Fatma Zohra Ksentini (Algeria).25 2 Mrs. Ksentini was stopped at
the France-Switzerland border by Swiss authorities while on her way to the
Sub-Commission, even though she informed the border police that she had
valid papers and displayed her UN identification badge. Other experts also
mentioned that they had experienced similar difficulties with the Swiss authorities.2 - 3 After a heated discussion on discrimination against foreigners
249. Appointment of Rapporteurs and Role of Alternates, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/3, at
9 (1992).
250. Although the role of alternates is unclear, it should be noted that alternates perform
varying roles at the Sub-Commission. This year, all members were assigned alternates,
except for Rajinder Sachar (India) and Fisseha Yimer (Ethiopia). Several alternates were
also selected to serve on Working Groups in 1993.
251. In an oral statement on 26 August 1992, Marc Bossuyt (Belgium) stated that the work of
the Sub-Commission had taken on such scope that members had no time to speak to
each other and read the material. He also stated that NGOs have taken the floor to
denounce the same government repeatedly and that this practice should stop. Other
experts renewed their objections to the frequency and number of NGO interventions,
especially where such interventions do not substantively comment upon the materials
before the Sub-Commission or are repetitive of one another.
252. U.N. Doc. Press Release HR/3140, at la & Corr.1 (13 August 1992).
253. loan Maxim (Romania) recalled that he had to wait hours to get into Switzerland, and
was only allowed to enter after he showed the border police a list of Sub-Commission
members with his name on it. Judith Attah (Nigeria) also recalled numerous problems
when crossing the border from France into Switzerland, even with a diplomatic passport.
Rajinder Sachar (India) commented that if it were not for the UN and the international
1993
from the developing world and the importance of diplomatic immunity for
Sub-Commission members, the Secretariat was instructed to issue each member the same type of official UN certificate that had recently been issued to
members of other UN organs. After members made threats not to leave the
Sub-Commission without credentials, the UN Secretariat distributed diplomatic credentials to all Sub-Commission members on the last day of the
session. Moreover, Mrs. Ksentini reported that she received a satisfactory
letter of apology from the Swiss authorities.
X. FINAL OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSION
For the first time at the Sub-Commission, a homosexual speaker addressed
the Sub-Commission on lesbian and gay rights, amidst some open hostility
to his remarks. 2. 4 He pointed out that an organization of lesbians and gays
has sought consultative status with ECOSOC. The speaker suggested the
appointment of a special rapporteur to study discrimination against lesbian
and gay people; he asked the Sub-Commission to encourage ECOSOC to
regard favorably the applications of lesbian and gay organizations for con25 5
sultative status.
The Sub-Commission also adopted resolutions on arms production and
25 7
trade in relation to human rights25 6 and discrimination against women.
254.
255.
256.
257.
community, Switzerland would resemble a minuscule part of India and that Geneva had
no monopoly on international conferences. Halima Warzazi stated, however, that the
UN should issue documents to all members and that the Sub-Commission should "go
on a public strike" the next time such an incident occurred. U.N. Press Release HR/3140,
at la-2 (13 August 1992).
The speaker, Professor Douglas Sanders, represented both the Human Rights Advocates
and the International Lesbian and Gay Association in a statement on 7 August 1992
during the discussion on the item of "Promotion, Protection, and Restoration of Human
Rights at National, Regional, and International Levels". See U.N. Press Release HR/3130,
at 5 (7August 1992), and Summary Record of the 6th Meeting, at 10, U.N. Doc. _.CN.4/
Sub.2/1992/SR.6 (1992).
U.N. Press Release HR/3130, at 5 (7 August 1992). In his statement, the speaker also
gave some of the following examples of positive developments at the national and regional
levels: the renewed commitment of Canada in June 1992 to introduce national legislation
prohibiting gay and lesbian discrimination; Denmark's 1989 Registered Partnership Law;
Australia's 1991 immigration law recognizing all relationships of "emotional interdependency"; and the adoption of Resolution 756 in 1981 by the Council of Europe
condemning discrimination against homosexuals. Nonetheless, lesbian and gay people
continue to face discrimination in laws dealing with inheritance, social and medical
insurance, housing, immigration, and, in certain cases, even extrajudicial killing. Statement of Human Rights Advocates and the International Lesbian and Gay Association, 7
August 1992.
Sub-Comm'n Res. 1992/39, 1992 Report, supra note 1, at 91. During the discussion prior
to its adoption, certain members voiced the opinion that this resolution went beyond the
field of human rights, and that it is utopian to think that there will be disarmament.
458
Vol. 15
Due to the recurring problems of voluntary and involuntary migration and
displaced persons, the Sub-Commission also decided to consider freedom
of movement, including refugees, during its next session.
Once again, the Sub-Commission was faced with an overcrowded
agenda with little time to give serious consideration to the multitude of
studies and reports presented. There was a general view among the SubCommission members that the interventions by NGOs, as well replies by
observer governments, were partially to blame for the lack of time. The SubCommission, however, adopted significant reforms of its methods of work
and agreed to consider further improvements at its next session.
While the Sub-Commission continued its important work and adopted
path-breaking resolutions on human rights violations in Bosnia-Herzegovina
(the former Yugoslavia), East Timor, Bougainville (Papua New Guinea), Haiti,
and Peru, it remains to be seen whether the guidelines on its methods of
work will resolve the problems challenging its existence. Nonetheless, in
spite of all the adversities, the Sub-Commission remains an accessible United
Nations forum to voice human rights violations all over the world.

The Forty-Fourth Session of the UN Sub

Transcription

Similar documents

Princess Diana - Sound Health Options

Staff member robbed and abducted

`bard

Competitiveness Up, Anxiety Down Using a

JpUirji". I

Sept. 1992 - Philippine Defenders Main

shift/launchcontroller

Response of a Rare Endemic, Penstemon clutei, to

Can I use the document camera as a webcam for Skype (and other

English